1997 (1) TMI 310 - AT - Central Excise

Summary

Issues:
- Whether the Modvat credit taken by the appellants based on certificates dated 24-4-1993 should be denied.
- Whether the facility of giving credit after the loss of original gate pass in transit on the basis of certified photocopy of gate passes was withdrawn by the Board.
- Whether the appellants are entitled to Modvat credit despite the loss of original gate passes.

Analysis:

The case involved a dispute regarding the Modvat credit taken by the appellants based on certificates dated 24-4-1993 due to the loss of original gate passes during transit. The appellants, manufacturers of batteries, received two consignments of Lead without the endorsed gate passes from M/s. Hindustan Zinc Ltd. The appellants requested the endorsed gate passes, but they were informed that the original gate passes were lost in transit by the transporters. The appellants received certificates from M/s. H.Z.L. godown at Calcutta regarding payment of duty on the consignments and took the Modvat credit on 4-5-1993. A show cause notice was issued questioning the Modvat credit, leading to the appeal before the Tribunal.

The appellants argued that the loss of the gate passes was beyond their control, and they should be allowed the Modvat credit based on the certificates received. On the other hand, the Revenue Commissioner contended that the facility of giving credit after the loss of the original gate pass in transit was withdrawn by the Board through a Trade Notice dated 27-1-1993. The Revenue relied on previous Tribunal judgments to support their position.

After considering the submissions, the Tribunal noted that the original gate passes were lost in transit between the factory and the godown. The Tribunal found that certificates from M/s. Hindustan Zinc Ltd. dated 24-4-1993 regarding the consignments were available as collateral evidence. As the Revenue did not dispute that the consignments were duty paid, the Tribunal allowed the appeal, granting the Modvat credit to the appellants based on the certificates provided. The Tribunal emphasized the availability of collateral evidence to support the appellants' claim, leading to the decision in favor of the appellants with consequential relief.