ORDER
Gowri Shankar, Member (T)
1. Application seeks to refer to the High Court of the following question of law :
“Rule 57G(2) of Central Excise Rules, 1944 confers powers only on CBEC to prescribe documents on the basis of which Modvat can be availed. Whether CEGAT which itself is a creature of the statute, can go beyond the provisions of the Act, and the Rules made thereunder and allow credit on duty paying documents not prescribed by the Act and Rules?”
2. We have heard the Departmental Representative who urges the grounds in the application. We have also heard the Advocate for the respondent.
3. In its order, the Tribunal, going by the earlier one of many decisions has said that bill of entry does not cease to be a duty paying document specified in Rule 57G merely for the reasons that it has been endorsed. In other words, the bill of entry is specified in Rule 57G as a document evidencing payment of duty for the purpose of taking credit. By the mere fact of endorsement being put on the bill of entry, it does not cease to be such bill of entry and therefore does not cease to be duty paying document specified in that sub-rule. Therefore, the point in the application that the Tribunal has extended the meaning of the relaxation given by the Board with regard to acceptance of endorsed bills of entry is not correct. The position might have been different if the documents specified in sub-rule to what was mentioned was not, as was, gives a bill of entry but a bill of entry on which no endorsement have been made. The Tribunal therefore has gone by the meaning of the word ‘bill of entry’ occurring in the rule. It has not gone or sought to go beyond the provisions of the rule. The application as framed therefore does not arise out of the order of the bench.
4. Application dismissed.