SALORA INTERNATIONAL LTD Vs. COMMR A CUS AND C EX
LAWS(ALL)-1999-11-139
HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
Decided on November 04,1999

SALORA INTERNATIONAL LTD. Appellant
VERSUS
COMMR.(A) CUS. AND C.EX. Respondents

JUDGEMENT

P.K.Jain, J. - (1.) In all the three petitions, identical question of facts and law are involved, therefore, all the three Writ petitions are being decided by common judgment.
(2.) The petitioners are engaged in manufacturer of Television and Audio system falling under Chapter sub-heading Nos. 8527 and 8528 of the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985 and are duly registered with the Central Excise Department. They are availing facility of Modvat credit on the inputs received and used by them in the manufacture of Television and Audio system. They were served with show cause notices dated 1-12-1995 and 29-2-1996 by Commissioner of Central Excise, Noida and by Assistant Commissioner of Central Excise, Noida, in which it was stated that they had wrongly availed Modvat credit of Rs. 1,07,98,261/- and Rs. 9,94,744.20 paise respectively. By the said notices they were required to show cause why the Modvat credit already availed by them be not reversed.
(3.) In the first notice the reasons for reversal of Modvat credit were that the petitioner submitted R.T. 12 return but did not submit duty paying documents i.e. Bill of Entries/Invoices and abstract of R.G. 23-A Part I Register which was required to be submitted under Rule 57G (4) of the C.E. Rules 1944; The quantity of inputs which have been shown to be received in R.G. 23 Part I are not tailing and matching with the quantity shown to be imported under Bill of entries. In some cases inputs appears to have been received in the factory premises as the date of receipt of inputs mentioned are not tailing with the date of clearance of goods from Customs House and in some cases the bill of entries were entered in R.G. 23 Part I Register on a date prior to actual receipt of the goods in the factory and in some cases the inputs are recorded in the statutory records without receipts of inputs in R.G. 23-A Part I which was required in Sub-Rule 57-G(2) Proviso 57G-3(a) of C.E. Rules and in some cases credit on the strength of duplicate copy of Bill of Entry was availed which documents were inadmissible and so on so-forth.;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.