TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2004 (4) TMI 189
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....this appeal, filed by M/s. Biotech Synergy Ltd., is whether the Modvat Credit of the duty paid on their finished goods received back, was eligible to them. 2. Shri K.K. Anand, learned Advocate, submitted that the appellants manufacture basically bulk drugs and avail Modvat Credit of the duty paid on the inputs under Rule 57A of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 at the material time; that during the ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....peal, filed by them, has also been rejected by the Commissioner (Appeals), under the impugned order, holding that the conversion of drugs confirming to IP standard to that of BP standard does not amount to manufacture. The learned Advocate, further, submitted that the appellants had filed the declaration under Rule 57G of the Rules with the jurisdictional Assistant Commissioner indicating the desc....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ey had availed the Modvat Credit on the basis of their own invoices for the consignments which had been rejected by their customers and, in fact, they should have brought those products under Rule 173H of the Central Excise Rules. 3. Countering the arguments, Shri Virag Gupta, learned DR, reiterated the findings, as contained in the Order-in-Original and impugned order and emphasised that the app....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....the receipt of the goods in R.G. 23A Pt. I and they issued for fresh manufacturing and the final products were duly entered in R.G. I Register. These facts have not been controverted by the Revenue. In view of these facts, the Revenue cannot claim that the appellants have not brought any material to show that the returned goods were not used in the process of manufacture. The Revenue has also not ....