AMRIT TANK Vs. CCE, BHOPAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) There is no representation for the appellants, However, they have requested for a decision on merits without hearing them. I have carefully examined the records and have heard ld. JDR Sh. S.C. Pushkarna for the respondents.

(2.) The appellants were engaged in the manufacture of Iron and Steel products and were availing the facility of modvat credit on inputs under Rule 57A of the Central Excise Rules during the relevant period. They took modvat credit of Rs. 2,81,768/ - on S.S. Plates (H.R. Coils) during the quarters ending December, 1995 and March 1996. The credit was disallowed by the jurisdictional Assistant Commissioner on the ground that the party had not filed the necessary declaration under Rule 57G. The assessees' application under Rule 57H for allowing the modvat credit was also rejected by the Assistant Commissioner for the reason that the provisions of Rule 57H were invocable only in respect of any stock of inputs existing on the date of filing of the Rule 57G declaration, there was no question of invoking Rule 57H. The decision of the Assistant Commissioner was upheld by the Commissioner (Appeals) in the appeal filed by the aggrieved assessees. Hence the present appeal before the Tribunal.

(3.) Ld. JDR Sh. S.C. Pushkarna submits that the inputs in question had not been declared at all by the assessees under Rule 57G. He further submits that no evidence of any such declaration having been filed has been brought on record by the appellants. It is further submitted that the declaration filed on 16.4.96 by the party under Rule 57H does not cover the entire quantity of inputs in question. It covers only those quantities of the inputs which had been received int eh appellant's factory under invoice No.s 1179 to 1181 and 1183 dated 29.2.96 and, even in respect of such quantities, any modvat credit could not have been allowed in the absence of Rule 57G declaration. In this connection, ld. JDR has referred to the provisions of Rules 57H (lB). He submits that the decisions of the departmental authorities are quite sustainable in law and, therefore, the appeal requires to be rejected.