2004 (11) TMI 487 - AT - Central Excise

Summary

Issues:
Denial of Modvat credit to the respondents on inputs received from a job worker under Rule 57F.

Analysis:
In this appeal, the issue revolves around the denial of Modvat credit to the respondents on inputs received from a job worker under Rule 57F. The respondents had claimed Modvat credit after receiving goods from the job worker on a triplicate copy of the challan/invoice due to the alleged loss of the duplicate copy in the factory. The adjudicating authority disallowed the credit initially, but the Commissioner (Appeals) allowed it, considering the loss of the duplicate copy as a procedural lapse. However, the judgment highlights that Modvat credit can only be claimed based on the duplicate copy of the invoice, and allowance on the original or triplicate copy is contingent upon proving the loss of the duplicate copy by the assessee. The Commissioner's decision to treat the lack of duplicate copy as a minor procedural lapse was deemed erroneous, emphasizing the mandatory nature of the rules regarding document requirements for claiming credit. The judgment clarifies that failure to prove the loss of the duplicate invoice cannot be considered a procedural lapse warranting credit on a triplicate copy. The legal precedents cited by the Commissioner and the Board circular referred to were found inapplicable to the case at hand.

Therefore, the impugned order of the Commissioner (Appeals) was set aside, and the appeal of the Revenue was accepted, restoring the original order disallowing the Modvat credit to the respondents.