1999 (11) TMI 422

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... Modvat credit earned and lying utilized in their records as on 1-3-1997. However, the proviso to the said Rule was to the effect that if the inputs are lying in stock or contained in finished products lying in stock as on 1-3-1997, the provision of the said Rule would not apply. The appellants' jurisdictional Central Excise Authorities entertained a view that if the inputs are lying in their factory as contained in semi-finished stage, the Modvat credit earned on the inputs is required to be debited by them inasmuch as the said proviso does not apply to semi-finished goods. Accordingly the appellants made a reverse entry of Modvat credit on 4-3-1997 equivalent to an amount of Rs. 10 lac and a little odd, by filing a declaration on 3-3-1997....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....es had come to the factory at the appellants' own request for verification of the declarations made by them in connection with Rule 57F(17)(b). Explaining the position in respect of each item he submitted that 29 drums of Norfloxacin were yet to be subjected to the process of blending and milling as well as final chemical analysis. In this connection he has taken the Bench to the blending records and analysis certificate relating to the goods in question. The said processes were taken by the appellants subsequent to the release of the goods. Similarly in respect of 40 drums of the said product he submits that some were not fully packed and the batch numbers were also not allotted. Similar explanations were given in respect of 19 drums of Pe....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....v)        1995 (79) E.L.T. 619 (Parle Beverages Pvt. Ltd. v. C.C.E.) (vi)       1990 (47) E.L.T. 100 (Topaz Commerce Ltd. v. C.C.E.). 3. Countering the arguments Shri T. Prem Kumar, learned SDR reiterated the reasonings of the adjudicating authority and submitted that even if the goods had not reached fully manufactured stage it was the duty of the appellants to enter the same in column 15 of the RG-1 register. In this connection he relied upon the Trade Notice issued by Indore Collectorate being No. 74 of 1994, dated 24-10-1994. 4. We have considered the submissions of both the sides. As regards the 40 drums, though the appellants had admitted that the same....