1999 (11) TMI 258

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... on the said appeal in time requesting to uphold the impugned order, and to dismiss the appeal for the reasons stated therein. 1. The facts of the case are that the respondents manufacture varnishes and others chemicals and availed Modvat credit on the inputs utilised therein. The show cause notice was issued on 5-7-1994, by the Assistant Collector Pune, Division-III to the respondents that during the period from 7-1-1994 to 30-6-1994, Modvat credit of Rs. 83,587.46 was taken and availed for the payment of Central Excise duty on the product 'CT Polymer' which is not the final product as per the Modvat declaration dated 28-12-1993 filed by the respondents, and a repacking of the which is not the final product as per the Modvat declar....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....under Rule 57-F(3) of the Central Excise Rules were not satisfied Modvat credit is not admissible as input is an exported goods only the part quantity is exported and the CT Polymer in same as the raw material Cresyl Titanate. The representative of the respondents has supported the impugned order and drawn attention to the para 4 of the order, according to which the department has accepted the clearance of input under the bond, and as pointed out in para 5 of the order. The Circular dated 31-12-1996 issued by the Board supports the case of the respondent. In the written submission it is urged that the respondents are procuring one of the input Cresyl Titanate and using as a catalyst in their various final product. They have submitted the de....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ure has put a deemed provision by which the assessee is regarded as manufacturer of the inputs. Rule 13 of the Central Excise Rules provides for export of goods without payment of duty. Further, Rule 57-F(4) which deals with the manner of the utilisation of credit of duty allowed in respect of inputs does not provide any restrictions on the use of credit of duty in respect of inputs which have been exported under bond. The appellants were, therefore, eligible for the Modvat credit in respect of the inputs exported under bond". The appeal does not show any reason as to how the impugned order is not correct, but only shown the finding in the Order-in-Original as grounds of appeal. The intention of the government is not to debar manufacture....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....assification list No. 34/93-94 from 20-12-1993 and 1/94-95 effective from 1-3-1994, according to the department it is not a final product but an input. The processes undertaken by the respondents is not a manufacture under Section 2(F) of the Central Excise Act. Admittedly, the processes undertaken is explained by the respondents as a test and repacking clearance for export. The Order-in-Original described the processes undertaken by the respondents the testing and packing and manufacturing process is involved. He has observed that the case of the respondent is the removal of the input as such, under Rule 57-F(i) (ii), as is manufactured in the factory by forgoing the Modvat credit to the extent already taken, if price of the input so sold ....