TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Tribunal allows Modvat credit for aluminum ingots, rejects appeal on Furnace Oil.</h1> <h3>COMMISSIONER OF C. EX., JAIPUR Versus MAHAVIR ALUMINIUM LTD.</h3> COMMISSIONER OF C. EX., JAIPUR Versus MAHAVIR ALUMINIUM LTD. - 2001 (135) E.L.T. 1251 (Tri. - Del.) Issues:- Availability of Modvat credit of duty paid on inputs to the assessee.Analysis:The judgment involved two appeals - one by M/s. Mahavir Aluminium Ltd. and the other by the Revenue, focusing on the availability of Modvat credit of duty paid on inputs to the assessee. The Advocate for the Respondent argued that the Modvat credit was disallowed due to the absence of the invoice number and date issued by the manufacturer on the invoice provided by the dealer. The dealer had procured aluminium ingots from M/s. National Aluminium Co. Ltd. (NALCO) and incorrectly referenced the commercial invoice instead of the required Rule 52A Central Excise Rules invoice. The Advocate contended that the commercial invoice did reference the required invoice details, indicating the duty paid nature of the inputs. On the other hand, the Advocate for the Revenue highlighted the legal requirements under Notification No. 15/94-C.E. (N.T.) and Rule 57G, emphasizing the necessity of complying with invoice specifications and submitting the original duty paying documents.Upon deliberation, the Tribunal considered both arguments. In the case of the appeal by the assessee, it was established that the dealer had indeed mentioned the necessary invoice details issued by NALCO, albeit in a different format due to NALCO issuing two types of invoices. The Tribunal found that the conditions specified in Notification No. 15/94 (N.T.) were met, allowing the Modvat credit for aluminium ingots. However, the appeal against the denial of Modvat credit for Furnace Oil was not pressed by the assessee and thus upheld. Regarding the Revenue's appeal, the Tribunal examined the documentation submitted by the assessee, including the RT12 Return and original duty paying documents. The Tribunal found that the original invoice, along with supporting documents, was submitted to the Range Officer as required, justifying the allowance of Modvat credit. Consequently, the Tribunal rejected the Revenue's appeal and allowed the appeal by M/s. Mahavir Aluminium Ltd. for the availment of Modvat credit on duty paid on aluminium ingots.In conclusion, the Tribunal upheld the availability of Modvat credit for the aluminium ingots in favor of the assessee, while also confirming the allowance of Modvat credit for the Revenue based on the submission of original duty paying documents.
TaxTMI 