1992 (9) TMI 183

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....hysical verification as compared to the stock recorded in the RG 1 register. The partner of the appellants' firm explained that this was on account of removal of this quantity internally for removing moisture content. The officers also noticed that the appellants had taken Modvat credit of duty paid in respect of the nickel metal being the input for nickel salt, on the strength of the certificates issued by the MMTC. On verification of the certificates, it was found that the duty has paid on the Bs/E by the MMTC on dates 25-10-1985, 8-7-1985 and 14-5-1986. It was therefore alleged that as per the provisions of Rule 57H(2), since the duty has been paid prior to 31-1-1986, they are not entitled to take the Modvat credit under the provisions o....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....(other than those inputs in respect of which credit of duty was allowable under any rule or notification prior to the 1st day of March, 1986, when used in the final products) shall be allowed if duty has been paid on the inputs on or before the 31st day of January, 1986." (emphasis supplied by the advocate) From the above, it is clear that where the inputs are eligible for credit of duty allowed under any rule or notification prior to the first date of March, 1986, credit of duty on such inputs shall have to be allowed and the bar regarding payment of duty on or before 31st December, 1985 to 31st January, 1986 is not applicable in such cases. He fairly agreed that this legal argument has not been taken before the lower authority. However....