By TIOL News Service

CHENNAI, JUNE 29, 2017: THE Assessee had claimed MODVAT credit in respect of the following goods -

i. Dumpers - Rs.8,10,570/-

ii. Hindustan Loaders - Rs.6,55,000/-

iii. Emitting Electrodes - Rs.61,200-

iv. Steel Casing - Rs.3,822/-

v. Classifier Housing - Rs.83,828/-

vi. Steel Structure - Rs.15,304/-

vii. Steel Wire - Rs.2,12,168/-

The Tribunal, by its order dated 10.09.2015, accepted the Assessee's claim for MODVAT credit in respect of the first six items while denying its claim with respect to steel wire.

In reaching this conclusion, the Tribunal relied upon its earlier order passed in Assessee's own case. However, the assessee had carried that matter in appeal to the Supreme Court, which rendered its judgement on 07.10.2015 = 2015-TIOL-272-SC-CX , in favour of the assessee.

The assessee, therefore, moved a rectification application before the Tribunal bringing to its notice the judgment of the Supreme Court. However, the Tribunal dismissed this rectification application vide its order dated 22.12.2006.

The Assessee has preferred the captioned appeals against these orders of the Tribunal.

After ascertaining that the goods "Steel Wire" were covered by the judgment of the Supreme Court, being referred at item no. 20 of the judgment of Tribunal appealed against, the High Court observed that the order dated 10.09.2015 of the Tribunal would have to be set aside. And ordered accordingly.

Insofar as the second CMA against the order dated 22.12.2006 is concerned, the High Court opined that the same had, in a sense, lost relevance for the Assessee, since, the impugned judgement of the Tribunal has been set aside.

Nonetheless, commenting that it would be a remiss of its duty if it failed to make observations on the order of the Tribunal that the period of limitation would commence from the date, when, the order was dictated in Court and, not from the date, when, it was signed, the High Court held -

"11.1. …, the period of limitation cannot, but commence from the date, when, the order is signed and thereafter, upon its receipt by the Assessee. The observations made by the Tribunal in paragraph 4, according to us, are erroneous in law."

In fine, the orders of the Tribunal were set aside and the appeals were allowed.

(See 2017-TIOL-1212-HC-MAD-CX)