9911796707
TMI Blog1996 (1) TMI 219X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ainst ttle order of Collector (Appeals), Chandigarh No. 37/CE/CHD/93, dated 22-1-1993. 2. It was their submission that the appellants had filed Modvat declarations on 26-9-1988, and 20-11-1990 and following the prescribed procedure, availed of the Modvat benefit. 3. Subsequently, a Show Cause-cum-Demand Notice dated 21-8-1991 was issued asking them to pay an amount of Rs. 5,83,127/-. 4. At t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... stay application (Para 8.1), they have given details of the items and the amount in question. 8. It was his submission that it was incorrect to say that there was no declaration or the declaration was vague in as much as they had filed a declaration on 26-9-1988 describing the inputs as Chemicals and showing the Heading as 2811.90 but in the declaration dated 20-11-1990 which covers the relevan ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ned DR very fairly stated that after perusing the annexures to the show cause notice and declaration dated 20-11-1990, he feels that the learned counsel is correct in stating that they had filed a declaration and described the products and indicated the headings and the sub-headings even in the case of `others . He has nothing further to add. 13. In response to queries from the Bench, both the s ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t of the required information. Further, it has already been held in a series of orders of this Tribunal that a substantive benefit, if otherwise due, should not be disallowed merely on account of minor procedural infractions. In view of the submissions made by both the sides which I find are correct and the above position, I set aside the impugned order and accept the appeal. - - TaxTMI - TMITa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
