2004 (8) TMI 567 - AT - Central Excise

Summary

Issues: Denial of Modvat credit to the respondents based on invoices not in their name.

Analysis:
1. The appeal was filed by the Revenue against the denial of Modvat credit amounting to Rs. 72,178 to the respondents. Despite notice, no one appeared on behalf of the respondents during the hearing.

2. The learned DR argued that Modvat credit could not be claimed based on invoices not in the name of the respondents as per Rule 52A. The Commissioner (Appeals) was criticized for allowing the credit by referring to a Board Circular, which was deemed inappropriate.

3. Upon review of the records, it was found that the respondents had claimed credit using invoices from M/s. Hatim Dielectrics (P) Ltd, Calcutta, intended for M/s. Rotomac Electrical Pvt. Ltd., and subsequently endorsed to the respondents. These invoices did not meet the requirements under Rule 57G.

4. The Commissioner (Appeals) had justified the credit by stating that M/s. Rotomac Electrical Pvt. Ltd. was associated with the respondents. However, it was clarified that M/s. Rotomac Electrical Pvt. Ltd. was a dealer, not a manufacturer like the respondents. The Circulars cited were deemed irrelevant to the case.

5. Consequently, the Tribunal set aside the Commissioner (Appeals) order and accepted the Revenue's appeal, emphasizing that the Modvat credit could not be availed based on invoices not compliant with the prescribed rules.