1999 (12) TMI 269 - AT - Central Excise

Summary

Issues:
- Denial of Modvat credit to the appellant
- Imposition of penalty on the appellant

Denial of Modvat credit to the appellant:
The appeal was filed against the Commissioner (Appeals), Bhopal's order denying the appellants Modvat credit of Rs. 69,593/- and imposing a penalty of Rs. 7,000/- on them. The Department alleged that subsidiary gate passes endorsed twice were not valid documents for taking credit under Rule 57G. The appellants argued that the subsidiary gate passes were issued in their name, indicating they were the original consignees. They referred to a Tribunal decision stating that Modvat credit cannot be denied if the appellant's name and address were shown in the gate passes, even if another consignee was also mentioned. The appellants contended that the endorsement by another agency was not necessary for availing Modvat credit. The judge observed that the appellants were shown as the original customers in the subsidiary gate passes, and the endorsement by the agency was not a prerequisite for availing credit. The judge found merit in the appeal, set aside the impugned order, and allowed the appeal.

Imposition of penalty on the appellant:
No specific discussion was provided regarding the imposition of the penalty on the appellant in the judgment. The focus of the judgment was primarily on the denial of Modvat credit to the appellant. The judge did not mention any findings related to the penalty imposed on the appellant. Therefore, it can be inferred that the penalty issue was not extensively discussed in this particular judgment, and the main decision revolved around the denial of Modvat credit, which was ultimately allowed in favor of the appellant.