Customs, Excise and Gold Tribunal - Bangalore
Commissioner Of Central Excise, ... vs Tractor And Farm Equipment Ltd., ... on 6 November, 2001
JUDGMENT
G.A. Brahma Deva
1. This is an appeal filed by the Revenue. When the matter was called none appeared on behalf of the respondents. However, on going through the issue involved herein, I find that the matter can be disposed off in their absence. The matter relates to modvat credit. Modvat credit has been denied on the ground that no declaration was filed by the party before availing credit.
2. Smt. Radha Arun appearing for the Revenue submitted that filing declaration is a statutory requirement, since this has not been done, party is not entitled to take modvat credit. In support of her contention, she relied upon the following decisions:-
1. 2000 (125) ELT 1171 - Visweswaraiya Iron & Steel v. CCE, Belgaum (Para 5.2)
2. 2000 (116) ELT 302 - CCE, Meerut v. Century Pulp & Paper
3. 1999 (105) ELT 125 - CCE, Jaipur v. Mewar Sugar Mills Ltd.
4. 1999 (112) ELT 1047 - BB Metal Industries v. CCE, Mumbai-1
3. The Commissioner (Appeals) while allowing the appeal filed by the party has observed as under:-
"I have carefully considered the appeal and the submissions made at the time of the Personal Hearing granted to the appellant's AR. It is seen that in all the cases, the appellant has filed intimations with the jurisdictional Superintendent and also verification has been done with reference to each intimation filed. Though the declaration under Rule 57T has not been filed by the appellant, thee is no doubt that there has been substantial compliance of the procedural requirements for availment of Modvat Credit. The CEGAT, has in several cases of this kind, allowed Modvat Credit condoning the technical error / lapse on the part of the assessee. I follow the same approach in the instant case and allow the appeal and consequential benefit of Modvat Credit to the goods in question in his case. The order of the original authority is accordingly set aside."
4. I find that much water has flown by developing the case law on the point at issue. Whether filing declaration is mandatory or not is required to be examined with reference to the development of the case law and that can be done by the adjudicating authority. In the view I have taken, the matter is remanded to examine the matter afresh and to pass an order in accordance with law in on providing an opportunity to the party. Thus this appeal is allowed by way of remand.
(Pronounced and dictated in open court.)