2001 (1) TMI 619

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... duly represented by Shri V.K. Chaturvedi, ld. SDR, for the Revenue and Shri P.S. Mahapatra, ld. Adv. along with Shri M.S. Dey, ld. Advocate it is seen that the Modvat credit was denied by the Asstt. Commissioner on different grounds. One of the ground was that though the respondent had filed the requisite declaration under Rule 57T in the office of the Asstt. Commissioner, they had taken the credit without awaiting the dated acknowledgment required to be issued by the Asstt. Commissioner. We find that the Tribunal in a number of cases has held that the date of filing of declaration in the office of the Asstt. Commissioner under a proper receipt amounts to obtaining dated acknowledgment and no separate acknowledgment is required. As such no....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... the said rule. 4. After giving our careful consideration to the above reasoning of the adjudication authority, we do not find ourselves in agreement with the same. Rule 57R(3) allows credit of specified duty paid on the capital goods to a manufacturer, if the capital goods are acquired by the loan agreement from a financing company subject to the procedure envisaged therein. The fact that the loan has been taken from the banks is not disputed. The question which arises is as to whether the expression 'financing company' occurring in the said rule has to be interpreted in a sense that the same would apply to a company registered under the Companies Act or the same would cover in its ambit any institution which finances the purchase of....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... such capital goods, to produce a copy of the invoice evidencing payment of specified duty along with a copy of the agreement entered into by him with the said financing company and sub-rule ii(b) requires production of a certificate from the financing company to the effect that duties specified on such capital goods has been paid by the said manufacturer to such financing company, prior to payment of first instalment of re-payment of loan. As such we hold that the provisions of Rule 57R(3) are required to be followed even where the capital goods are acquired by the assessees under a loan agreement from the banks. The Commissioner (Appeals) has adopted another reasoning to the effect that hypothecation of the machines to the lender does no....