1998 (5) TMI 103

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....hether the credit of duty paid on the inputs used in products which are captively consumed and are exempted from the whole of the duty of excise under Notification No. 217/86-C.E. can be allowed to the assessee? (ii) Whether the credit can be allowed to the assessee when the assessee has not declared the final products in their declaration filed under Rule 57G? 2. The brief facts leading up to the filing of the application are that the respondents herein are engaged in the manufacture of chlorofluro hydrocarbons of methane (fluoron 11 and fluoron 12) classifiable under CET sub-heading 2903.10, and mixture of fluoron 11 and fluoron 12 classifiable under CET sub-heading 3823.00, and were availing Modvat credit of the duty paid....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... classifiable under CET sub-heading 2903.10 is not sufficient, even though both the products are chlorofluro hydrocarbons of methane. Since neither the description of the final product nor their classification was declared under Rule 57G, learned DR submits that credit cannot be extended to the respondents and they cannot also be treated as final products and, therefore, the provisions of Rule 57D are not attracted in this case. He supports the contention that a question of sufficiency of the declaration is a question of law requiring reference by citing the Tribunal's order in the case of Indian Hume Pipe Company Ltd. reported in 1996 (83) E.L.T. 172 and J.K. Synthetics reported in 1997 (94) E.L.T. 91. 4. Learned Counsel draws our ....