ORDER
K.S. Venkataramani, Vice President
1. The appeal is against the impugned order of the Commissioner (Appeals) captioned above by which he has held that the respondents will be eligible for Modvat credit under transitional facility as per Rule 57H by virtue of a letter dated 21-4-1989 submitted by them to the Asstt. Commissioner on their coming to the Modvat credit after availing of exemption under Notification. No. 175/86 and coming to the duty paying area. Shri S.V. Singh, the ld. DR pointed out that the Commissioner (Appeals) has ignored the fact that the respondents have applied for the transitional facility under Rule 57H only on 16-5-1989 whereas earlier to that date the Rule itself has been amended on 5-5-1989 which deleted the provision for taking the transitional Modvat credit on input contained in the finished product lying in stock. The Commissioner (Appeals) has gone beyond the provisions of Rule 57H as it existed at the material time when the respondents made their application.
2. The respondents have also filed what they called cross-objection which really is mis-conceived because there is no reason in the Commissioner (Appeals) order with which they can claim to be aggrieved. We find that the Commissioner (Appeals) observed that the Asstt. Commissioner has ignored that the respondents had opted to the Modvat credit on 21-4-1989 and the transitional Modvat credit under Rule 57H is to be reckoned as to the date of declaration under Rule 57G since the respondents herein had filed the declaration on that date stating therein that the particular in respect of Rule 57H would follow. The Commissioner (Appeals) has taken a broader view of the provisions of Rule 57H and we find no infirmity in such a view being taken having regard to the beneficial nature of the Modvat scheme to avoid the cascading effect of the input duties on the final product. We also note that the Government themselves have subsequently restored the provisions under Rule 57H which was deleted by the amendment on 5-5-1989. We, therefore, see no reason to interfere with the impugned order. The appeal is rejected.