Customs, Excise and Gold Tribunal - Delhi
Eveready Industries India Ltd. vs Commissioner Of Central Excise on 14 February, 2000
Equivalent citations: 2000(120)ELT160(TRI-DEL)
ORDER V.K. Agrawal, Member (T)
1. The present appeal has been filed by M/s. Eveready Industries India Ltd. against the Order-in-Appeal, dated 25-4-1997 dis-allowing the Modvat credit of the duty paid on the inputs.
2. I heard Shri M.P. Devanath, Learned Advocate and Shri Y.R. Ki-lania, Learned D.R. The Collector (Appeals) has disallowed the Modvat credit as the invoices on the strength of which the credit was taken was not pre-authenticated, I agree with the submissions of the appellants that non pre-authentication of the invoices is a curable defect and it has been the consistent view of this Tribunal that the Modvat credit cannot be denied merely on the basis of a curable defect. Further, the learned Advocate has mentioned that the defect was cured subsequently. The second ground on which the Modvat credit has been denied is that the declaration for availment of Modvat credit, under Rule 57G of the Central Excise Rules, was received by the Assistant Commissioner after the availment of credit. The Learned Advocate has submitted that they had filed the declaration on 27-2-1995 and thereafter the credit was availed of and as such credit was available to them. On query from Bench, Learned Advocate replied that he was not aware whether any application for condonation of delay was filed by them with the Assistant Commissioner. I observe from the Board's letter dated 7-3-1996 that Board has clarified that credit should not be denied merely on the ground that the declaration has been filed after the receipt of goods and in all such cases the manufacturer should file an explanation for delay in filing the declaration. This matter is therefore remanded to the Assistant Commissioner before whom the Appellants would file an application for condonation of delay in filing the declaration and the Assistant Collector is directed to consider the same.
3. Regarding denial of Modvat credit in respect of packing and forwarding charges I find that the same cannot be denied merely on the ground that these charges were shown separately in the invoices. It is not the case of department that these charges were not included in the assessable value of the inputs and accordingly the Modvat credit is available to the Appellants. The Tribunal in the Appellants' own case vide final order No. A/860/98, dated 11-8-1998 has allowed the credit in respect of packing and forwarding charges. As the credit was availed of by the Appellants on the basis of invoices which was not pre-authenticated and also before filing the declaration some amount of penalty is imposable. However, taking into consideration the circumstances of the matter I reduce the amount of penalty from Rs. 10,000/- to Rs. 1000/- only.
4. The appeal is disposed of in the above terms.