TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
1996 (7) TMI 270
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nt parties. The appellants have not produced any evidence to prove that the said parties are not manufacturers. It is obligatory on the part of the parties claiming Modvat to prove that the inputs were purchased from manufacturers or outside if the deptt. so desires but in the present case, the appellants have failed to discharge this obligation even when it was proposed to disallow the credit. Thus, it is clear that the goods were in fact purchased from different manufacturers and failure on the part of the appellants to adduce duty paying document further proves that the goods are non-duty paid and therefore, no credit is admissible. Under such circumstances, I uphold the orders of Asstt. Collector. 4.3 The appeal is rejected & di....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ks could not come into existence. The appellants also cited and relied upon the decision of the Collector, Central Excise (Appeals) in his Order Nos. 252-255-CE/CHG/88, dated 16-6-1988 wherein he had allowed the credit of duty paid on inputs in respect of the very same inputs in the petitioner's own case. It was argued by the appellants that expression used in or in relation to the manufacture of final products is very wide and encompasses the entire process carried on by the manufacturer. The appellants for this contention cited and relied upon the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of J.K. Cotton Spinning and Weaving Mills v. STO (16 STC 563). The various items on which the department proposed to deny the credit of duty against the in....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Das, the learned SDR appearing for the respondents submits that the short issue for determination in the present appeal is whether deemed Modvat credit was admissible to the appellants on copper scrap/wire and aluminium. He submits that it has clearly been held by the Asstt. Collector that "It is observed that the said goods were purchased from the factory and in this case, no deemed credit was admissible. The party can avail the deemed credit facility only if the goods are clearly recognisable as non-duty paid or charged to nil rate of duty. In the instant case, the goods were purchased from the factory." The learned SDR reiterating the findings of the lower authorities submitted that the deemed Modvat credit has rightly been denied by th....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....le as being non-duty paid. Order dated 2-5-1988 - No credit, shall however, be allowed :- (ii) If such inputs are clearly recognizable as being non-duty paid or wholly exempt from duty or charged to nil rate of duty. These orders have been issued by the Central Government on the basis of the enabling proviso to Rule 57G (2) to extend the benefit of Modvat credit to certain manufacturers who would otherwise be not entitled to it. Therefore, the scope meaning and intent of the Government Orders must be considered in the backdrop of parent Rule and the Rules in Section AA which incorporates the Modvat Credit Scheme. 19. There can be only four contingencies in which duty is not paid on ....