Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 5 of 5 (0.20 seconds)
Commissioner Central Excise vs M/S Raymond Ltd on 2 May, 2013 cites

Union Of India And Another vs G.M. Kokil And Others on 21 March, 1984

The second proviso of Rule 57G of the Rules specifically provides that the manufacture shall not take credit after six months of the date of issue of any of the documents specified in the first proviso to this sub-rule. This provision specifically provides that no modvat credit shall be made available to the assessee, if such modvat credit was claimed after a period of six months from the date of issuance of the documents. But in the present case, as has been stated hereinabove, the respondent had applied modvat credit for the first time in its notification on 4-9-1996 i.e., during the year in which modvat credit was claimed under the provision contained in Rule 57H. Under Rule 57H of the Rules, there is no provision for claiming such modvat credit beyond the period of six months from the date of issuance of documents. The aforesaid rule begins with the non obstante clause `Notwithstanding anything contained in Rule 57G', meaning thereby that the provision of Rule 57G of the Rules were specifically excluded from the provision of Rule 57H and nothing contained in Rule 57G of the Rules was applicable for the applicability of Rule 57H. In the present case, as indicated hereinabove, the modvat credit which was claimed by the respondent for the first time on 4-9-1996, the Commissioner (Appeals) as well as the Tribunal after considering the provisions as contained in Rule 57H of the Rules have rightly recorded the finding that the provision of Rules 57H being a transitional provision and begins with the non obstante clause, as have been quoted hereinabove, and excludes the provision which are contained in Rule 57G of the Rules. Thus, the denial by the Assessing Officer of modvat credit to the respondent merely on the ground that the same was claimed beyond the period of six months was not justified. A clause beginning with non obstante clause, is something appended to a provision with a view to give overriding effect to the provision, in case there is some conflict of the provision with over provision. [See: Union of India vs. G.N. Kokil, AIR 1984 SC 1022, T.R. Thandur vs. Union of India, AIR 1996 SC 1643.] We do not find any error in the impugned order and involvement of any question of law to be referred to this Court.
Supreme Court of India Cites 17 - Cited by 162 - V D Tulzapurkar - Full Document

T.R.Thandur vs Union Of India & Ors on 8 April, 1996

The second proviso of Rule 57G of the Rules specifically provides that the manufacture shall not take credit after six months of the date of issue of any of the documents specified in the first proviso to this sub-rule. This provision specifically provides that no modvat credit shall be made available to the assessee, if such modvat credit was claimed after a period of six months from the date of issuance of the documents. But in the present case, as has been stated hereinabove, the respondent had applied modvat credit for the first time in its notification on 4-9-1996 i.e., during the year in which modvat credit was claimed under the provision contained in Rule 57H. Under Rule 57H of the Rules, there is no provision for claiming such modvat credit beyond the period of six months from the date of issuance of documents. The aforesaid rule begins with the non obstante clause `Notwithstanding anything contained in Rule 57G', meaning thereby that the provision of Rule 57G of the Rules were specifically excluded from the provision of Rule 57H and nothing contained in Rule 57G of the Rules was applicable for the applicability of Rule 57H. In the present case, as indicated hereinabove, the modvat credit which was claimed by the respondent for the first time on 4-9-1996, the Commissioner (Appeals) as well as the Tribunal after considering the provisions as contained in Rule 57H of the Rules have rightly recorded the finding that the provision of Rules 57H being a transitional provision and begins with the non obstante clause, as have been quoted hereinabove, and excludes the provision which are contained in Rule 57G of the Rules. Thus, the denial by the Assessing Officer of modvat credit to the respondent merely on the ground that the same was claimed beyond the period of six months was not justified. A clause beginning with non obstante clause, is something appended to a provision with a view to give overriding effect to the provision, in case there is some conflict of the provision with over provision. [See: Union of India vs. G.N. Kokil, AIR 1984 SC 1022, T.R. Thandur vs. Union of India, AIR 1996 SC 1643.] We do not find any error in the impugned order and involvement of any question of law to be referred to this Court.
Supreme Court of India Cites 10 - Cited by 57 - J S Verma - Full Document
1