1998 (8) TMI 287 - Commissioner - Central Excise

Summary

Issues:
- Appeal against Order-in-Original denying credit on photocopy of Bill of Entry and TR-6 challans.
- Application under Section 35F of Central Excise Act for waiver of pre-deposit.
- Eligibility for credit on attested Bill of Entry and TR-6 challans.
- Admissibility of credit on transformer based on duty paying documents.

Analysis:
The appeal was filed against an Order-in-Original denying credit on a photocopy of Bill of Entry and TR-6 challans. The appellant, a manufacturer of Nylon Filament Yarn and Nylon Tyre Fabrics, took credit on these documents, but the adjudicating authority rejected it, stating the documents were invalid. The appellant argued that TR-6 challan is a valid duty paying document for availing Modvat credit, citing a relevant tribunal case. The main issue was whether the credit was rightly denied. The judge examined the case records and submissions, noting that the TR-6 challan had a cross reference to the lost Bill of Entry. Referring to a similar case, the judge held that credit on a reconstructed Bill of Entry is admissible if the department is satisfied about the receipt and utilization of inputs. As the appellant had produced an attested photocopy of the Bill of Entry and TR-6 challan, and the use of capital goods was not disputed, the judge found the credit to be valid.

Regarding the application under Section 35F for waiver of pre-deposit, the judge considered the facts and the appellant's compliance with substantive requirements, ultimately ruling in favor of the appellant. Additionally, the issue of credit on a transformer was addressed. The adjudicating officer had initially held the credit to be admissible, but later denied it based on the alleged invalidity of the duty paying documents. However, the judge found that the documents were not invalid, leading to the allowance of the appeal and setting aside of the impugned order. The judgment emphasized the eligibility of the appellant for credit on the attested Bill of Entry and concluded that the denial of credit on the transformer was no longer valid.