2001 (10) TMI 203

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....re of medicaments and were availing the facility of Modvat credit on inputs during the period of dispute. Way back in 1996, the appellants had imported certain inputs and cleared the same on payment of duties under Bill of Entry dated 6-11-96. As they lost the triplicate copy of the Bill of Entry, they could not take Modvat credit of the Countervailing Duty (CVD) paid on the goods. However, on the....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... rejected by the Commissioner (Appeals). Hence the present appeal. 2. Examined the records. It appears that, as already noted, the show cause notice raised two grounds for denying the Modvat credit. One of these grounds was that the reconstructed triplicate copy of Bill of Entry was not a valid document in terms of Rule 57G(3) of the Central Excise Rules for the purpose of availment of Modvat c....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... with the limitation question. 3. I have heard both sides. Ld. Advocate, Shri Ramesh Nair submits that a reconstructed Bill of Entry has been held to be valid document in terms of Rule 57G for Modvat purposes, by the Tribunal in the case of Hemant Plastic & Chemicals Ltd. v. CCE [2000 (92) ECR 78]. On the limitation aspect, the counsel submits that the prescribed period of limitation of six mon....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... of reconstructed Bill of Entry. I would concur with, and follow, this view. Therefore, the decision (on the point) of the lower appellate authority in the instant case cannot be sustained. Insofar as the question of time-bar is concerned, I observe that once the reconstructed document is accepted as valid duty-paying document for Modvat purposes it should be the date of reconstruction of the docu....