2007 (7) TMI 128

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....2005, upholding the order-in-original by which Modvat credit of Rs. 1,96,298/- taken by the appellant was disallowed with the direction to reverse the credit or pay the amount and penalty of Rs. 20,000/- imposed on the appellant. 2. According to the Revenue, during the course of scrutiny of the monthly return for the month of February, 2000, it was observed that the said Modvat credit was taken....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....it was held that such credit could not be taken beyond six months from the date of receipt of the inputs. In Unipatch Rubber Ltd. (supra), the Tribunal held, in para 6 of the order, that the time limit laid down in Rule 57G by the amendment dated 29-6-1995 was very categorical and there was no rule or provision for relaxing the time limit. 5. It appears that the following proviso was inserted o....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... 6. Reliance placed by the appellant on the decision of the Tribunal in its own case, which has since been reported in 1998 (102) E.L.T. 381 is wholly misplaced because in their earlier case the period involved was from 1990 to March 1994 and the Tribunal, in fact, held in para 8 of the order that it was well settled by the decision the Tribunal that Modvat credit taken within six months of receip....