2000 (8) TMI 411 - AT - Central Excise

Summary

Issues involved:
1. Delay in filing the appeal by Revenue.
2. Availing Modvat credit twice - once at the stage of receipt of raw materials and the second time at the stage of receipt from the job worker.

Analysis:
1. The judgment addresses the issue of a delay in filing the appeal by Revenue due to continuous holidays and officers being on leave. The delay of 4 days is condoned, and the appeal is taken up for decision. The grounds of appeal raised by Revenue challenge the findings of the Commissioner of Central Excise & Customs, arguing that Modvat credit was wrongly availed twice. The appeal proceeds for decision as the respondents did not appear.

2. The main issue revolves around the availing of Modvat credit twice by the appellant. The appellant contends that the Modvat credit was availed in two stages - first at the receipt of raw materials or inputs and second when the module frames were received back from the job worker. The Commissioner (Appeals) found that the appellant received the inputs in totality, and there was no ground for raising a demand. The Commissioner also noted that the Modvat credit was not taken twice as alleged, as the duty demanded from the job worker was not paid, and the credit was only for the differential duty. The Commissioner set aside the Order-in-Original, allowing the appeal with consequential benefit. The Tribunal upheld the Commissioner's findings, stating that the appeal was filed on grounds not existing in the Commissioner's findings and, therefore, dismissed the appeal.

In conclusion, the judgment addresses the issues of a delay in filing the appeal by Revenue and the alleged wrongful availing of Modvat credit twice. The Tribunal upheld the Commissioner's findings, emphasizing that the Modvat credit was not taken twice and dismissing the appeal.