TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2008 (5) TMI 442
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....it petition is allowed and the orders passed vide Annexures P-15, P-18 and P-20 are quashed and it is directed that the competent authority shall verily the .records and pass appropriate orders in consonance with the law laid down in the case of Gilt Pack Ltd. (supra) within a period of three months. In the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case there shall be no order as to costs." 2. The aforesaid order was challenged in LPA No. 16/01 and the Division Bench vide order Annexure C-2 dated 15-3-2001 [2002 (142) E.L.T. 562 (M.P.)] affirmed the order. The order of Division Bench was also assailed before the Apex Court in S.L.P. (Civil) C.C. 2142/02 and by order dated 8-3-2002 (Annexure C-3) the Apex Court dismissed the S.L.P. [20....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....d counsel for the petitioner submitted that W.P.No. 4488/99 was allowed and the earlier order of the respondent rejecting the claim of the petitioner was quashed and the High Court in writ petition specifically directed that the competent authority shall verify the record and pass an appropriate order in consonance with the law laid down in the case of Gilt Pack Ltd. v. Assistant Collector, Central Excise, Indore [1994 (69) E.L.T. 222 (M.P.), so the respondent was not entitled to reopen the issue which was finally settled by the order of this Court in Gilt Pack Ltd. (supra) which was duly followed by learned Judge of this Court in W.P. No. 4486/99 [2001 (129) E.L.T. 296 (M.P.)]. That in C.P. 101/04 also the learned Single Judge of this Cour....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... the petitioner was claiming modvat credit for the period between 6-5-1989 and 20-12-1989 but it was not entitled. Rule 57(H) of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 which was prevalent at the relevant time was amended vide notification dated 5-5-1989 by which sub-clause 2 was deleted from the Rules, hence the modvat credit for the period between 6-5-1989 to 20-12-1989 was not available to the petitioner. In the case of Gilt Pack Ltd. the dispute was in respect of declaration dated 20-12-89 and the rule which was in existence on the aforesaid date was considered by the High Court, while in the case of petitioner Rule 57(H) of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 was amended by notification No. 201/89 dated 5-5-1989 so the aforesaid modvat credit was no....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....the party of earlier order was allowed by the Hon. High Court and decision of the M/s Gilt Pack Ltd. case, the verification was done in respect of the records available with the department and also records submitted by the party. The party's claim pertain to the inputs contained in the process, semi-finished goods and finished goods therein. The erstwhile amended proviso of Rule 57(H) did not permit the credit in respect of such inputs, which are lying in stock. 2.15. The Hon. High Court's orders dated 15-12-2000 and 10-10-2003, where under it has been held that the Rule which was invoked at the time of deposit would come into play. The rule for the relevant period which is being referred to in the High Court's order is Rule 57-H of....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....sed in the manufacture of final products which are cleared from the factory on or after the 1" day of March, 1987 was omitted. In terms of the direction of the High Court order dated 15-12-2000, 10-10-2003 and 11-4-2005 to the effect that the Rule which was invoked at the time of deposit would come into play and the deposit of amount implies deposit of duty on inputs of which Modvat Credit is being claimed by the party in this case. It is clear that the claim for the period 5-5-89 and thereafter would be governed by the amended proviso of Rule 57-H and claim for the period prior to 5-5-89 would be govern by the unamended old Rule 57-H. In term of amended Rule 57-H, the credit of inputs used in the manufacture of final products, which are cl....