TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
1998 (12) TMI 241
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....acturer of tomato sauces, fruit jam, pulp juice, etc. falling under Chapter Heading No. 2006.10. Tomato Ketch up and Sauce falling under the Chapter Heading No. 2103.11 of Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985. They were exempted from duty under Notifications 19 and 27/91, dated 25-7-1991 respectively. Respondent had balance in the RG23A-II Rs. 35,970.82, and balance of duty paid inputs on which the credit worked out to Rs. 69,872/-. They had also stock of finished goods, in which the duty paid inputs were used and the quantum of such duty involved on such input were Rs. 3,67,744.82 as on 25-7-1991. Total balance of credit on the above dated was Rs. 4,37,616.82 ps. Respondent did not reverse them. 2. Show-cause notice was issued on 28-1-199....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ty on final products from 25-7-1991, and also the legal position under Rule 57C, but denied the contravention of Rule 57C on the ground that after 25-7-1991, they have neither availed Modvat credit, on duty paid inputs, nor they have utilised the credit balance lying in RG-23A Part II. There is no rule either to reverse or debit it. It automatically stands lapsed, due to non user. They admit that they should debit the Modvat credit to the extent input contained in the final product as shown in Annexure II to show-cause notice as final products will be cleared at nil rate of duty after 25-7-1991. The total stock of finished goods, which are carry forward stock of the last more than 4 years contain damaged or deteriorated goods, which are not....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ere are sufficient grounds to allow the appeal. My finding is in the affirmative. 5. Heard the learned DR. He has urged that Credit balance of duty paid on inputs and stock of finished goods on which duty paid inputs are used require reversal by Respondent under rule 57C of Central Excise Rules. Perused the order in original page 4. The discussion of the Assistant Collector is too vague viz. "legal requirements of reversal of Modvat credit has not been fulfilled and not observed the Central Excise procedure prescribed under Modvat Rules, regarding availment utilisation and reversal of Modvat credit" as alleged in the show-cause notice. There is no pointed discussion on this point about the contravention of specific provision of the ru....