2003 (7) TMI 461

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....eorge, JDR, for the Respondent. [Order]. - The appellant took proforma credit under Rule 56A in 1985 of the duty paid on some inputs that it received from Dass Hitachi Ltd. and Ranutrol Pvt. Ltd. Subsequently, each of these manufacturers paid additional sums towards duty on these goods. When the goods were cleared, duty had not been correctly calculated, as a reduction in the level exemption....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....eal. 2. The basis for denial of the credit is that evidence in the form of certificate by the Superintendent having jurisdiction of the range of the two manufacturers from whom the inputs were received has not been produced. The Assistant Collector has gone considerable lengths in his order to say that this was a condition for taking credit. It would appear that, while permitting the appel....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... reduced on the inputs, the credit taken by the recipient will be correspondingly less. All that was required was to establish that additional duty has been paid. This has been done in the case of inputs that Dass Hitachi Ltd. received by means of certificate issued by the jurisdictional Superintendent, and in the case of Ranutrol (P) Ltd., by means of the attestation by the Inspector having juris....