Customs, Excise and Gold Tribunal - Delhi
Kelvinator Of India Ltd. vs Collector Of Central Excise on 15 February, 1996
Equivalent citations: 1996ECR151(TRI.-DELHI), 1996(85)ELT175(TRI-DEL)
ORDER S.L. Peeran, Member (J)
1. In this case the Collector has reviewed the Modvat Credit allowed by the Assistant Collector in the order-in-original i.e. granting the assessee the benefit of MODVAT Credit in respect of duty amount of Rs. 19,127/- in respect of C.R. Sheets in coils which falls under Tariff sub-heading 7209.30.
2. The short facts of the case are that the appellants are manufacturers of Motor vehicles. They had filed the MODVAT declaration on 18-8-1988 declaring the inputs as CR sheets falling under Chapter sub-heading 7209.20 of Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985. On 22-4-1992 they received CR sheets in coil form falling under Chapter sub-heading 7209.30 vide GP-1 2798 and 2767 dated 27-3-1992 and dated 25-3-1992. The same was entered into RG-23 Part I vide Entry Nos. 143 and 144, dated 22-4-1992. They filed the revised declaration on 4-5-1992 in respect of this input i.e. CR Sheets in coil form and they took the MODVAT in respect of this goods in RG-23A While Part II vide Entry Nos. 762 & 763, dated 10-8-1992. The Department on verification on 22-1-1993 raised an objection hence they debited the same vide their RG 23A Part II Entry Nos. 1741 and 1742, dated 22-1-1992. They represented to the Assistant Collector who after due consideration allowed the MODVAT Credit vide 56/93, dated 28-6-1993. The same was availed vide RG-23A Part II Entry Nos. 233 & 234, dated 6-7-1993.
3. The Revenue was aggrieved with the said order of the Assistant Collector and filed a review appeal before the Collector (Appeals). The Collector (Appeals) has considered the aspect in a very narrow compass and has taken a view that the CR Sheets and CR sheets in coil are two different things in the Tariff and as they had not declared the CR Sheets in coil form in their declaration dated 4-5-1992 filed under Rule 57G the benefit cannot be extended to them. He has also held that the claim for MODVAT under Rule 57H is not sustainable, as the said Rule applies only to transitional provision and does not apply to the facts of the present case.
4. I have heard the learned Advocate, Shri R.L. Vohra for the appellants and Shri P. Dass, the Learned SDR for the Revenue in this matter.
5. On a very careful consideration of the submissions and on perusal of the records, I find the order of the learned Collector is not sustainable. The simple reason being that both the items CRC Sheets as well as CR Sheets in coil form are both classifiable under Chapter 72 and they are declared inputs for the purpose of granting the MODVAT Credit under Notification No. 177/86, dated 1-3-1986. The appellants had after receipt of the inputs at the first instance itself filed a revised declaration on 4-5-1992 even before taking the MODVAT Credit in RG-23A Part II and the same had been rightly considered by the Assistant Collector. The minor variation in this case in only with regard to sub-heading of the item while both the inputs fall under the same Chapter heading and therefore, so long as the items fall under the same Chapter heading specified in the Notification, the benefit of the MODVAT Credit cannot be denied to them. In this particular case the appellants had rightly followed the procedure and notwithstanding the provision of Rule 57H the appellants were entitled to the benefit of the MODVAT Credit. The Tribunal has also taken a view in the case of Chamundi Steel Re-rolling Mills v. Collector of Central Excise, as reported in 1996 (81) E.L.T. 563 that MODVAT Credit cannot be denied to the assessee so long as they have observed all the procedures and maintained the records. In this particular case there has been no violation and that the assessee has followed all the procedure and therefore. Assistant Collector had rightly granted them the benefit.
6. In that view of the matter, I set aside the impugned order and allow the appeal.