2004 (5) TMI 459 - AT - Central Excise

Summary

Issues:
1. Denial of Modvat credit to the appellants.
2. Disallowance of specific credits based on different grounds.

The judgment by the Appellate Tribunal CESTAT, NEW DELHI involved an appeal where the benefit of Modvat credit was denied to the appellants. The disallowance of credits was based on specific grounds. Firstly, a credit of Rs. 13,476.06 was disallowed as it was taken based on the Original copy of invoices, not the Duplicate copy of the transporter, which is considered a valid duty paying document for MODVAT purposes. Secondly, a credit of Rs. 402.00 was initially denied because the Gate pass was endorsed after 1-3-1994. However, as per a previous Tribunal decision, the credit was allowed as the Gate pass was endorsed in the appellants' name before 30-6-1994. Lastly, a credit of Rs. 8,439/- was disallowed initially as the appellants had not declared an alternator in the declaration for claiming credit of capital goods. However, considering an amendment in the rules applicable to pending cases, the Tribunal remanded the matter to the Adjudicating authority for a fresh decision on the admissibility of credit regarding the alternator as capital goods.

Regarding the credit of Rs. 13,476.06, the appellants admitted that the credit was based on the Original copy of invoices, not the Duplicate copy of the transporter. The Tribunal noted that it is established that credit can be taken on the Original copy of invoices if the Duplicate copy of the transporter is lost during transportation. As the appellants did not receive the goods under the Duplicate copy of the transporter, which is a valid duty paying document for MODVAT purpose, the lower authorities were correct in denying the credit. Consequently, the appeal was disposed of in line with this finding.

In conclusion, the judgment addressed the denial of Modvat credit to the appellants based on specific grounds. It highlighted the importance of adhering to the prescribed documentation requirements for claiming credits, such as using the appropriate duty paying documents like the Duplicate copy of the transporter. The Tribunal's decision to allow certain credits based on previous rulings and amendments to relevant rules showcased a nuanced approach to ensuring fair treatment in such cases.