1993 (7) TMI 177

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ts had some stock of inputs on which they had taken credit prior to that date. A show, cause notice was issued for recovery of credit availed as the Department considered that once the final product had been removed from the coverage of modvat scheme, the credit of duty on inputs lying unutilised before the date of such withdrawal lapsed and could not be utilised. 2. The adjudicating authority confirmed the demand of Rs. 3,29,945.10 under Rule 57-1 and also imposed a penalty of Rs. 10,000/- under Rule 173Q of the Central Excise Rules, 1944. 3. The lower appellate authority upheld the demand on the basis that once the item is withdrawn from the modvat scheme, the concept of final product or input loses its significance or validity with....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....High Court in the case of Dipak Vegetable Oil Industries Ltd. v. Union of India reported in 1991 (52) E.L.T. 222 wherein the Court has held that a right acquired under the statutory provision is not liable to be taken away retrospectively unless so provided. The relevant extract from the judgment is reproduced below : "10. While it is true that the right to get credit came into existence only on issuance of the aforesaid notifications, on a correct interpretation of Rule 57N read with Rule 57K, it will have to be held that the right to utilise the credit so earned did not come to an end the moment the said notifications were rescinded. In this context it is pertinent to note that only the aforesaid notifications have been rescinded and n....