Full Judgment
Ginni Bedi submits that the conditions of Rule 57H have been satisfied by the appellants, as not only were the inputs received on 4-11-1992 available till 29-1-1993, but were also used in the manufacture of final products during the period from 29-1-1993 to 28-7-1993. She, therefore, submits that credit has been rightly availed of. Learned DR, Shri Y.R. Kilania reiterates the findings in the impugned order.
2. I find great force in the submissions of learned Counsel. Rule 57H as it stood during the relevant time as under: "Notwithstanding anything contained in Rule 57G, the Assistant Collector of Central Excise may allow credit of the duty paid on inputs received by a manufacturer immediately before obtaining the dated acknowledgement of the declaration made under the said rule if he is satisfied that: (a) such inputs are lying in stock, or are received in the factory, on or after the 25th day of July, 1991 or (b) such inputs are used in the manufacture of final products which are cleared from the factory on or after the 25th day of July, 1991." In this case, the first condition has admittedly been satisfied. There is nothing to rebut the contention of the appellants that the second condition has also been fulfilled. Further, as pointed out by the learned Counsel, the appellants came under the purview of the Modvat scheme only on 29-1-1993 and, therefore, the question of their filing a declaration under Rule 57H at any point of time prior thereto, did not arise. Rule 57H declaration was filed within a period of six months from the date of filing of Rule 57G declaration and credit was availed only during the period after filing 57G declaration. Therefore, the appellants are entitled to Modvat credit in terms of Rule 57H.Accordingly the impugned order is set aside and the appeal allowed.