CCE Vs. LUDHIANA STEEL LTD.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is a reference application filed by Commissioner Central Excise, for referring the following question of law arising out of Tribunal Final Order No. A/548 -550/ 98 -NB dated 4.5.1998.

(2.) SHRI R. D. Negi, Ld. SDR, submitted that the requirements of filing a declaration under Rule 57G for the purpose of availing of the Modvat credit is a mandatory requirement; that as the respondents had not declared the inputs received by them in their declaration, they were ineligible to avail of the credit of the duty paid on the inputs; that in absence of physical verification of the inputs received by the Central Excise authorities, it is but essential that the declaration is filed correctly in respect of the inputs intended to be received. He further, submitted that prior to 6.10.88, there was no time limit specified in Rule 57I for issuing the show -cause notice and importing the limitation provided in Section 11A was not warranted; that, therefore, the question of law as framed by the Commissioner are required to be referred to the Hon'ble High Court.

(3.) OBJECTING to the reference application, Shri K.K. Anand, Ld. Advocate, submitted that the Modvat credit in respect of the impugned inputs was allowed by the Tribunal on appreciation of the facts of the case; that the Tribunal found that the impugned material received by the Respondents were used in their furnace for the purpose of manufacturing steel ingots and these were not used for re -rolling purposes; that the Tribunal also observed that if the supplier had been asked to declare the products differently, the Respondents could not be denied the benefit of the Modvat credit if the material received by them are used for the specific declared purposes. The Ld. Advocate, therefore, contended that no question of law is involved as far availing of Modvat credit is concerned. He also mentioned that no reference has been made in the case of Vimal Alloys Pvt. Ltd. v. CCE, Chandigarh Order No. A/783 -86/95 -NB dated 29.9.95, which was relied upon by the Tribunal at the time of passing the order. Regarding treating limitation providing under Section 11A into Rule 57I, the Ld. advocate mentioned that the issue has now been settled by the Supreme Court, in the case of CCE, Jaipur v. Raghuvar India and as such no question of law remains to be decided by the Hon'ble High Court. The Ld. Advocate, further, submitted that as the Modvat credit has been allowed to the respondents the issue regarding time limit is not relevant or material.