TaxTMI Login
AI OCR ✕Convert scanned orders, printed notices, PDFs and images into clean, searchable, editable text within seconds. Starting at 2 Credits/page
Try Now →Just a moment...
AI OCR ✕Convert scanned orders, printed notices, PDFs and images into clean, searchable, editable text within seconds. Starting at 2 Credits/page
Try Now →
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
of 
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: (i) Whether mild steel flats exceeding 5 mm in thickness continued to enjoy exemption after Notification No. 202/88-C.E. superseded Notification No. 90/88-C.E. with effect from 20-5-1988; (ii) Whether the appellants were entitled to deemed Modvat credit under the Ministry's order dated 20-5-1988 and whether there was a finding that such credit had already been availed of on the same inputs under any other rule or notification.
Issue (i): Whether mild steel flats exceeding 5 mm in thickness continued to enjoy exemption after Notification No. 202/88-C.E. superseded Notification No. 90/88-C.E. with effect from 20-5-1988.
Analysis: Under Notification No. 90/88-C.E., flats exceeding 5 mm in thickness were expressly covered among the eligible final products. Notification No. 202/88-C.E., which superseded the earlier notification from 20-5-1988, omitted flats from the description of eligible products. The subsequent amending notification restoring the exemption came only from 1-3-1989. On that basis, the exemption was not available during the intervening period.
Conclusion: The exemption was not available to flats exceeding 5 mm in thickness from 20-5-1988 to 1-3-1989, against the assessee on this issue.
Issue (ii): Whether the appellants were entitled to deemed Modvat credit under the Ministry's order dated 20-5-1988 and whether there was a finding that such credit had already been availed of on the same inputs under any other rule or notification.
Analysis: The Ministry's order allowed deemed credit for specified inputs purchased from outside and lying in stock on or after 1-3-1988, but it prohibited credit where duty on the same inputs had already been availed of under any other rule or notification granting such credit. The record showed no clear finding by the authorities below that the same inputs had already suffered credit under another scheme. The demand itself suggested absence of such prior credit, and the reference in the Ministry's order was to credit on the same inputs, not on earlier inputs used by suppliers.
Conclusion: The denial of deemed credit could not be sustained without a clear finding on prior availment of credit on the same inputs, in favour of the assessee for reconsideration.
Final Conclusion: The matter required fresh consideration by the appellate authority on the limited question of prior availment of credit on the same inputs, while the denial of exemption for the relevant period was upheld.
Ratio Decidendi: Where deemed credit is denied on the ground of prior credit, a clear finding that credit on the same inputs was already availed under another rule or notification is necessary before disentitling the assessee.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
