9911796707
TMI Blog1996 (9) TMI 407X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 20-7-1994 on 21-7-1994. The dealers who issued the invoices are M/s. Genrewala Brothers, Calcutta M/s. Utkal Glass House, Calcutta. 2.3 Prior to 4-7-1994, it may be stated at this stage, these invoices were valid for the purpose of allowing the Modvat credit. However, on 4-7-1994, a Notification No. 32/94-C.E. (N.T.), dated 4-7-1994 was issued prescribing the documents under Rule 57G for the purpose of taking the Modvat credit. It, inter alia, prescribed invoice issued by a dealer of excisable goods registered with the Central Excise Officers. Simultaneously, another Notification 33/94-C.E. (N.T.), dated 4-7-1994 was issued inserting Rule 57GG which prescribed that every person who issued the invoice or invoices under Rule 57G shall ge ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... bsequently would be acceptable if he was eligible to issue the invoice/document under Notification 15/94-C.E. and Notification 21/94-C.E. (N.T.). 3. Since the aforesaid clarification did not extend the benefit to the appellants herein inasmuch as the persons who issued the invoices did not get themselves registered with the Central Excise authorities under Rule 174, the lower authorities have disallowed the benefit of Modvat credit taken by the appellants. Apart from the reversal of Modvat credit of Rs. 22,143/ and penalty of Rs. 250/ has also been imposed on the appellants. It is against the aforesaid order that the appeal has now been filed by the appellants. 4. The appellants, in their appeal memo have stated that the Board duly reco ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n to deny the Modvat credit so long as the duty-paid character of the inputs covered by the invoices is not denied by the Department. Any number of citations have been made in the appeal memo for the proposition that a substantive benefit should not be denied for procedural infractions or procedural deviations. It is, therefore, urged that the Modvat credit should not be recovered and the penalty should not be imposed. In other words, the impugned order be set aside. 5. Opposing the contention of the appellants in their appeal memo, Shri B.B. Sarkar, ld. JDR, reiterates the findings of the lower authorities. 6. I have carefully considered the pleas advanced from both sides. I find substantial force in the submissions of the appellants i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
