Customs, Excise and Gold Tribunal - Delhi
M/S. Vindhya Telelinks Limited vs Commissioner Of Central Excise, Raipur on 21 March, 2001
ORDER
K.K. Bhatia, Member
1. The facts in the present appeal are that the appellants availed MODVAT credit totally amounting to Rs.1,90,844/- on the strength of what is stated to be the EDP copy of Bill of Entry No.12353 dated 30.4.96. The proceedings were initiated against them and the Superintendent, Central Excise, Range-I, Rewa (M.P.) issued them a show cause notice dated 3.1.97 in which it was alleged that the availment of the MODVAT credit on such document is in contravention of the provisions of Rule 57G, in which it is mandated that no credit shall be taken unless the inputs are received in the factory under the coverage of the Triplicate copy of the Bill of Entry.
2. Considering the reply of the party, the Commissioner of Central Excise, Raipur, vide his order dated 30.8.2000, observed that during the relevant time, the Triplicate copy of Bill of Entry remained with the party. Thus, the party should have availed the MODVAT credit only on the Triplicate copy of Bill of Entry which was the proper, legal and valid document for MODVAT purposes under the Proviso to Clause (2) of Rule 57G of Central Excise Rules, 1944. Accordingly, the Commissioner in his order rejected the claim of the party for availing the MODVAT credit on EDP copy of the Bill of Entry. The Commissioner in his order has further imposed a penalty of Rs.10,000/- under Rule 173Q of the Central Excise Rules, 1944.
3. The party is in appeal against the above order of Commissioner. I have heard Shri N.R. Khaitan, learned Advocate of the appellants and Shri Swatantra Kumar, learned JDR for the respondent. The matter is today listed for hearing the Stay Petition filed by the appellants. The learned Advocate for the appellants relies on the Proviso (j) under Sub-Rule (2) of Rule 57G of the Central Excise Rules which provides for availment of MODVAT credit under the cover of a Duplicate copy of a Bill of Entry generated on Electronic Data Interchange System installed in any Customs or Central Excise Commissionerates. It is contented that since admittedly, they have availed the MODVAT credit on the strength of the EDP copy of the Bill of Entry, they are covered under these provisions and there is no warrant to deny them the MODVAT credit availed by them. Shri Swatantra Kumar, JDR for the Revenue on the contrary argues that the appellants have availed the MODVAT credit on the EDP copy of the Ex-Bond Bill of Entry which is not specified as one of the document under the stated provision since such Bill of Entry should have been generated on the Electronic Data Interchange System installed in any Customs or Central Excise Commissionerates. Since, in this case the impugned Bill of Entry has not eminated from any Customs or Central Excise Commissionerates, the MODVAT credit on the same is not admissible.
4. I have considered the submission made before me by the both sides. The matter for hearing today is only at the Stay stage. I find force in the contention of the learned JDR that the provisions claimed by the appellants as covering their case are not applicable in this case. The so called EDP copy of the Bill of Entry under consideration is issued from a Bonded Warehouse and not from an Electronic Data Interchange System installed in any Customs or Central Excise Commissionerate as provided under the Proviso (j) of Rule 57G (2). In view of this fact, therefore, the appellants have not made out a prima facie case in their favour. There is no plea of any financial hardship before me. I, therefore, directed them to make the deposit of entire amount of duty/MODVAT credit on or before 24.5.2001. On making such deposit, the amount of penalty imposed on them shall stand waived and its recovery stayed till the disposal of the appeal. The matter will be called for reporting compliance on 28.5.2001.
5. Announced and dictated in Court.