Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether a Modvat declaration filed under Rule 57G continued to remain valid after exemption from duty on the final product, and whether credit already taken could be denied on the ground that the assessee had ceased to be within the Modvat scheme.
Analysis: The declaration had been filed in 1986 and was never withdrawn. The input, manufacturing process, and final product remained unchanged, and the rules contained no express provision that an exemption from duty would automatically terminate an earlier declaration. The mere fact that duty on the scrap was withdrawn for a period did not mean that the assessee had opted out of the Modvat scheme or that the declaration had lost effect. The separate contention regarding clearances before approval was not examined, as it had not been dealt with by the lower authorities.
Conclusion: The declaration under Rule 57G remained valid, and denial of Modvat credit on the ground that the assessee had gone out of the scheme was not justified.
Final Conclusion: The departmental challenge failed, and the assessee's entitlement to credit was upheld on the ground that the original declaration continued to operate.
Ratio Decidendi: In the absence of an express statutory provision, exemption from duty on the final product does not terminate a validly filed Modvat declaration where the input, process, and product remain the same.