Skip to content
How to use Judgment tools
  1. Click Tools to open PDF, Print, Tag, Note, Favourite, and CiteSignal.
  2. Use Brief & Ask in the toolbar for the AI Brief and case chat.
  3. Jump to sections with the pills below the help bar.

Cce Vs. Usan Laboratories Pvt. Ltd.

Cce vs Usan Laboratories Pvt. Ltd.

Type Court Judgment Court Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai Decided Apr 20, 1999
~2 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/15671

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

  • 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
  • Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
  • Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
  • Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account

Citation
Court
Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Judge
Decided On
Subject
Service Tax

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Service Tax

Key legal issue
Service Tax

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Cce

Respondent

Usan Laboratories Pvt. Ltd.

Legal References

Reported In
(1999)(85)LC488Tri(Mum.)bai

Excerpt

1. this is an appeal against the decision of collector (appeals), mumbai made in order-in-original no. nk (575) 1143/94 dated 9.1.1995 whereunder he ordered entitlement of modvat credit for six months, that is the reasonable time. the assessees are a private limited company engaged in the manufactured of bulk drugs classifiable under chapter 29. they received various inputs during the period march 1991 to april 1992 and the credit for the inputs were taken during the period march 1992 to july, 1992. the department objected the taking of the credit belatedly as the inputs were entered in rg-23a pt. i. so it should taken immediately thereafter.2. the collector (appeals) in the impugned order after referring to order, no. 473/92/wrb dated 20.3.1992 in the case of serene dyestuff v.cce, pune and the case of mysore lac & paints works ltd. held that modvat credit can be availed within a reasonable time i.e. six months period is a considerably reasonable time. accordingly he granted benefit to the assessee respondent for availment of modvat credit within six months from the receipt of the inputs.3.i have considered the grounds of appeal of the department. i do not agree with the grounds that just because reference has been filed against the tribunal's decision in mysore lac paints works ltd. precedent value of that decision is negated. i, therefore, reject the contentions of the department and dismiss the appeal.

Full Judgment

1. This is an appeal against the decision of Collector (Appeals), Mumbai made in Order-in-Original No. NK (575) 1143/94 dated 9.1.1995 whereunder he ordered entitlement of modvat credit for six months, that is the reasonable time. The assessees are a private limited company engaged in the manufactured of bulk drugs classifiable under Chapter 29. They received various inputs during the period March 1991 to April 1992 and the credit for the inputs were taken during the period March 1992 to July, 1992. The department objected the taking of the credit belatedly as the inputs were entered in RG-23A Pt. I. So it should taken immediately thereafter.

2. The Collector (Appeals) in the impugned order after referring to Order, No. 473/92/WRB dated 20.3.1992 in the case of Serene Dyestuff v.CCE, Pune and the case of Mysore Lac & Paints Works Ltd. held that modvat credit can be availed within a reasonable time i.e. six months period is a considerably reasonable time. Accordingly he granted benefit to the assessee respondent for availment of modvat credit within six months from the receipt of the inputs.

3.I have considered the grounds of appeal of the department. I do not agree with the grounds that just because reference has been filed against the Tribunal's decision in Mysore Lac Paints Works Ltd. precedent value of that decision is negated. I, therefore, reject the contentions of the department and dismiss the appeal.

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial