Back
2006 Supreme(P&H) 3687
PUNJAB & HARYANA HIGH COURT
Adarsh Kumar Goel and Rajesh Bindal JJ.
Commissioner Of C. Ex., Delhi-iii
Versus
Maruti Udyog Limited
CEA No. 100 of 2006,
Decided On : OCTOBER 10, 2006
Interest is not recoverable from a party on wrongly availed Modvat credit if the credit was not utilized and was only taken as an entry in the Modvat record.
Headnote:
Interest - Modvat Credit - The court held that interest is not recoverable from a party on wrongly availed Modvat credit if the credit was not utilized and was only taken as an entry in the Modvat record.
Fact of the Case:
The assessee claimed Modvat credit without the requisite certificate under Rule 57E of the Central Excise Rules, 1944, and credited the amount in RG-23A Part-II. The authorities disallowed the Modvat credit, but the Tribunal held that the assessee was not liable to pay interest as the credit was only taken as an entry in the Modvat record and was not actually utilized.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that in the absence of utilization of credit, the assessee was not liable to pay interest. The court dismissed the appeal as it did not find any substantial question of law arising from the factual position.
Issues: Whether interest is recoverable from a party on wrongly availed Modvat credit when the credit was not utilized and was only taken as an entry in the Modvat record.
Ratio Decidendi: The court's decision was based on the factual finding that the assessee did not avail of the Modvat credit in fact and had only made an entry, leading to the conclusion that no substantial question of law arises.
Final Decision: The appeal was dismissed by the court.
1. This appeal has been preferred by the revenue proposing following substantial question of law :-
#28;Whether interest is recoverable from a party on wrongly availed Modvat credit taken by them in the year 1998 on the strength of certificate issued by the range Superintendent under Rule 57E on 29-3-1995 under sub-rule 3 of Rule 57-I?#29;
2. The assessee claimed Modvat credit which was not allowable in absence of requisite certificate under Rule 57E of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 (for short, #24;the Rules#25;) being produced within six months but still the assessee claimed the same and credited the amount in RG-23A Part-II. The authorities disallowed the Modvat credit relying upon judgment of the Hon#25;ble Supreme Court in Osram Surya (P) Limited v. Commissioner of Central Excise, Indore, 2002 (142) E.L.T. 5 (S.C.).
2.1 The Tribunal, however, held that the assessee was not liable to pay interest as the credit was only taken as an entry in the Modvat record and was not infact utilised. The Tribunal held that in absence of utilisation of credit, the assessee was not liable to pay interest.
3. We have heard learned Counsel for the appellant.
4. Learned Counsel for the appellant is unable to show as to how the interest will be required to be paid when in absence of availment of Modvat credit infact, the assessee was not liable to pay any duty. The Tribunal has clearly recorded a finding that the assessee did not avail of the Modvat credit in fact and had only made an entry.
5. In view of this factual position, we are unable to hold that any substantial question of law arises.
6. The appeal is dismissed.
