Customs, Excise and Gold Tribunal - Bangalore
Traco Cable Co. Ltd. vs Commissioner Of C. Ex. on 18 September, 2003
Equivalent citations: 2003(162)ELT596(TRI-BANG)
ORDER C.N.B. Nair, Member (T)
1. The dispute is regarding the Modvat credit of about Rs. 27.000/-.
2. The appellants' submission is that, they had taken the credit within the stipulated time limit of six months. However, on account of the mistaken impression that only 95% of the duty amount could be taken as credit the full amount was not taken. Subsequently, the amount of credit short taken I.e. 5%, was also taken. The learned counsel for the appellants contended that it is a case where only correction of an error in the amount involved was done, and not a case of taking of fresh credit. In this connection, he has relied upon the decision of this Tribunal in the case of CCE, Jaipur v. Parasrampuria Synthetics Ltd., 2000 (116) E.L.T. 581 (T), wherein it has been held that corrections of this nature are not covered by the time limit stipulated in Rule 57G(2). The learned SDR refers to the Larger Bench decision of this Tribunal in the case of Kusum Ingots, 2000 (120) E.L.T. 214 (Tri. - LB), and submits that any credit taken, will have to be taken within the time limit of six months. He also refers to the decision of the Apex Court in the case of Os-ram Surya (P) Ltd. v. CCE, Indore, 2002 (142) E.L.T. 5 (S.C.).
3. The present is a case of correction of error committed while taking the credit. It is not a case of taking credit against the document. To such a case, the decision of this Tribunal in the case of CCE, Jaipur v. Parasrampuria Synthetics Ltd., supra, specifically applies. Consequently, the appeal is allowed with consequential relief, if any, to the appellants.