1995 (4) TMI 168

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....the appellants' writ appeals in part by a common order directed the appellants to "file appeals' within 30 days from 14-12-1994 complying with all the requirements of law" and further directed that if appeals are filed the CEGAT shall decide the appeals without going into the question of limitation. All contentions of the party were left open and the High Court Division Bench also further directed the Tribunal "to decide the appeals within a period of three months from the date of filing of the appeals." The appeals were filed on 16-1-1995 and as directed by the Division Bench of Madras High Court, the appeals were listed for hearing on 29-3-1995 and after few adjournments the appeals were taken up finally for disposal today. 3. Ms.....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....- -do- 21,586.64 1,000 -do- -do- -do- 37,451.88 1,000 4. The learned Counsel submitted that at the relevant time Rule 57H dealing with the transitional provisions clearly stated that notwithstanding anything contained in Rule 57F, the Assistant Collector of Central Excise may allow credit of the duty paid on inputs received by a manufacturer before filing a declaration under Rule 57G if he is satisfied that such inputs are lying in stock or are received in the factory on or after 1-3-1986. The learned Counsel submitted that the inputs in the present case were lying in stock in the factory of the appellants on or after 1-3-1986 and the main ground on which the authorities directed reversal of the MODVAT credit....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....the inputs lying in stock even though the appellants are entitled to take credit before filing a declaration under the MODVAT scheme, they should have done it after obtaining the permission of the Asstt. Collector. In the present case, the appellants took credit even though they filed a declaration, without obtaining the permission of the Asstt. Collector. The learned DR further submitted that the assessments were of provisional in nature and therefore bar of limitation will not be applicable. The learned DR urged that the further question that would require consideration would be as to whether the inputs have already suffered duty. At this stage, Ms. Hema, the learned Counsel, intervened to clarify that the inputs had suffered duty and wer....