2004 (9) TMI 482 - AT - Central Excise

Summary

Issues: Validity of order reversing delay condonation for filing declaration of capital goods.

Analysis:
1. The appeal questions the validity of the order where the Commissioner (Appeals) reversed the order-in-original that condoned the delay in filing the declaration for capital goods.

2. The Counsel argued that the Assistant Commissioner rightly condoned the delay of less than three months and allowed the credit, citing the case law of Grasim Industries, which states that credit cannot be denied for late filing when goods' receipt is not in dispute.

3. The learned DR supported the impugned order's correctness.

4. The judge noted that the appellants received capital goods but filed the declaration after the stipulated period, within three months of goods' receipt. The Assistant Commissioner condoned the delay and allowed Modvat credit. The Commissioner (Appeals) reversed this, citing lack of reasons for delay condonation. The judge held that the Assistant Commissioner was not obligated to record detailed reasons and could condone delays up to three months. The Commissioner (Appeals) failed to consider the amended Rule 57G and the Grasim Industries case, which states credit cannot be denied solely for non-filing of declaration if receipt and utilization of goods are proven. As there was no dispute on goods' receipt and utilization, the Assistant Commissioner rightly condoned the delay. The Commissioner (Appeals) erred in reversing the order without legal grounds.

5. Consequently, the judge set aside the impugned order of the Commissioner (Appeals) and disposed of the appeal in favor of the appellants.