KANORIA INDUSTRIES LTD Vs. UNION OF INDIA UOI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THESE two writ petitions are by assessees under the provisions of the Central Excise Act, 1944 [for short, the Act] in the context of denial of what is known as Modvat credit which the petitioners had availed of in respect of high speed diesel (HSD) oil, which according to the petitioners was used as an input in the production of electricity at their units wherein they manufacture cement. The scheme of availment of Modvat credit under the Act is governed by the provisions of Rules 57a, 57b, 57c to 57v of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 [for short, the rules].

(2.) IN the case of writ petitioner in W. P. No. 35766 of 2000, the dispute arose in the context of modvat credit that had been availed by the petitioner on the HSD oil used as input for production of electricity in turn used for manufacturing cement during the period December 1997 to March 1998, which credit though availed of by the petitioner was directed to be reversed in terms of endorsement dated 19-6-2000 issued by the Superintendent of Central Excise, Gulbarga. This petitioner did comply with this suggestion and reversed the Modvat credit and to this extent nothing remains.

(3.) HOWEVER, the communication dated 19-6-2000 being on the premise that in terms of Section 112 of the Finance Act, 2000, such Modvat credit having been disallowed, the petitioner was advised to reverse the entry and it is only because of Section 112 of the Finance Act, 2000 the petitioner is losing the valid Modvat credit that it had availed of earlier and but for this provision, the petitioner could have continued to reap the benefit of Modvat credit and the petitioner therefore feeling aggrieved by this endorsement as also the provision of Section 112 of the Finance Act, 2000, has challenged the constitutional validity of this statutory provision and for quashing the consequential endorsement and further direction for restoration of the Modvat credit entry.