2001 (8) TMI 136 - HC - Central Excise

Summary

Issues:
1. Eligibility of Modvat credit on incomplete invoices under Notification No. 3/94-C.E., dated 4-7-1994.

Analysis:
The case involved a reference petition by the Revenue under Section 35H(1) of the Central Excise Act, 1944 against an order passed by the Customs, Excise and Gold (Control) Appellate Tribunal (CEGAT). The main question raised was whether Modvat credit is permissible on invoices lacking full particulars, specifically the assessable value required by Notification No. 3/94-C.E., dated 4-7-1994.

The respondent, engaged in manufacturing forklifters, excavators, and tractors, had availed Modvat credit based on various invoices. The adjudicating authority disallowed the credit due to missing assessable values on certain invoices. Despite the respondent providing a dealer's certificate with necessary particulars and complete information on some invoices, the Additional Commissioner upheld the disallowance. The Commissioner (Appeals) also dismissed the appeal.

Upon approaching the CEGAT, it set aside the previous orders and allowed the Modvat credits claimed on invoices from one entity but disallowed those from another due to missing particulars. The Revenue contended that failure to provide assessable values rendered the Modvat credit inadmissible, emphasizing it as a substantial legal requirement for establishing duty paid on inputs.

The High Court analyzed the case, noting that the adjudicating authority did not specify the required information on invoices. It found that the respondent had submitted complete details for certain invoices, as evidenced by the dealer's certificate. The Court observed that the show cause notice did not specify the necessary particulars or mention that Modvat credit hinged on stating the assessable value. It concluded that no legal provision mandated disclosing assessable values for availing Modvat credit under Notification No. 33/94-C.E. (N.T.), dated 4-7-1994.

Ultimately, the High Court dismissed the Revenue's reference petition, determining that no question of law merited a reference, as the respondent had provided adequate information and the assessable value was not a mandatory requirement for claiming Modvat credit under the relevant notification.