LAWS(CE)-2003-5-236

TILRODE CHEM Vs. CCE

Decided On May 09, 2003
Tilrode Chem Appellant
V/S
CCE Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal arises out of and is directed against the Order (Original) No 168/92 dated 30.10.1992 passed by the Collector of Central Excise, Bangalore.

(2.) Arguing in support of the appeal, Shri Ramesh Ananthan, learned Advocate submitted that Modvat credit in respect of packing material has been disallowed by the Collector following the ratio of the decision of the Tribunal in the case of Commissioner of Central Excise v. Soubhagya Confectionary (P) Ltd. . He submitted the issue in the case of Soubhagya Confectionary (P) Ltd. has been decided following the earlier decision of the Tribunal in the case of Pond's India Ltd. v. Collector . He said that the High Court of Madras has reversed the view taken by the Tribunal in the case of Ponds (India) Ltd. v. Collector of Central Excise, . Subsequently the Tribunal has followed the decision of the High Court of Madras in the case of Parle Products Pvt. Ltd. v. Collector of Central Excise . He also drew our attention to Para 14 of the impugned order which reads as under"14. The assessee has admitted on his own that both the plain Aluminium Foils and Glassine Poly Foils, on which Modvat credit was availed were sent out for printing, which was carried out at the job workers premises, without obtaining any permission form the Department, under Rule 57F(2) and also no Excise procedures were followed. This very admissions proves that M/s. Tilrode Chem, have willfully misdeclared the packing material, the plain aluminium foil/Glassine poly foil as an input under Rule 57A. It is well settled that no modvat benefit can be availed outside the ambit of modvat scheme unless the procedural requisite of the Modvat are followed including the basic Rule 57A. So far as case laws are concerned, I would like to rely upon the most relevant case law as in the case of Soubhagya Confectionary (P) Ltd. v. Collector, decided by the South Regional Bench of Madras, wherein the Hon'ble Tribunal disallowed Modvat to a manufacturer who was sending carton for printing and receiving back before using the same as raw materials/packing materials."

(3.) Heard Shri Narasimha Murthy, JDR for Revenue.