Customs, Excise and Gold Tribunal - Mumbai
Flexoplast Abrasive (India) Ltd. vs Commissioner Of Central Excise And ... on 12 May, 1999
Equivalent citations: 1999(66)ECC190
ORDER Gowri Shankar, Member (T)
1. Application is for waiver of deposit of Rs. 62198 and penalty of Rs. 5,000. Applicant is absent and unrepresented despite notice. We have read the stay application and heard the departmental representative.
2. The applicant had filed in December 1994 an application for taking credit on stock of inputs under Rule 57H. After some exchange of correspondence the applicant without waiting for formal communication took credit. Subsequently the Assistant Commissioner passed Order dated 9.1.1995 rejecting the application on the ground that Modvat credit was not available on paper and paper boards from 1st April, 1994. Notice has been issued for recovery of wrongly taken credit. The Assistant Commissioner confirmed this demand which has been confirmed by the Commissioner (Appeals) in the impugned order.
3. The stay application does not make any grounds for waiver of deposit. Appeal makes emphasis on the ground that credit was available under Rule 57H. However, we are prima facie, unable to find any submission on the finding of the Commissioner (Appeals) that, since the Assistant Commissioner's Order dated 9.1.1995 had not been appealed and it has reached finality. We therefore find no prima facie, case for the applicant.
4. According we direct the applicant to keep unutilised in the credit the amount demanded within two months from the date of receipt of this order. On such deposit being shown we waive deposit of the penalty and stay its recovery.