2004 (12) TMI 485 - AT - Central Excise

Summary

Issues: Challenge to Commissioner (Appeals) order on validity of delivery note as an invoice under Rule 52A and specified document under Rule 57G(3) of Central Excise Rules, 1944.

In this judgment, the Revenue challenged the Commissioner (Appeals) order, arguing that the delivery note, although containing all particulars, was wrongly considered an invoice under Rule 52A and a specified document under Rule 57G(3) of the Central Excise Rules, 1944. The Revenue contended that the delivery note was invalid as it was not prescribed under Modvat Rules, and Rule 57G(2) stipulates that no credit can be taken unless inputs are received with specified documents. The Commissioner (Appeals) was criticized for not specifying the details in the delivery challan based on which credit was taken. On the other hand, the respondents' representative argued that as per the explanation to Rule 52A, documents like invoice challans or advice containing required particulars are valid for taking credit. The Commissioner (Appeals) had already determined that the delivery note provided all necessary particulars, and since the duty paid nature of goods was acknowledged, and all required details were in the delivery note, denying credit was unwarranted. Consequently, the judgment upheld the Commissioner (Appeals) decision, deeming it legally sound and dismissing the Revenue's appeal.