9911796707
TMI Blog1997 (7) TMI 355X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ayyar, JDR, for the Respondent. [Order]. - This appeal arises from order dated 6-3-1997 by which Commissioner (Appeals) has not accepted Invoice No. 575, dated 6-7-1994 as the goods had been received from the consignee agent and has held that it cannot be treated as proper documents under Notification No. 32/94-C.E. (N.T.), dated 4-7-1994 issued under Rule 57G(2) of Central Excise Rules. 2.&em ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e with regard to the formalities. He also submits that the Tribunal has looked into this issue in detail in the case of Bengal Safety Industries v. Collector of Central Excise, Calcutta-I as reported in 1997 (92) E.L.T. 81 wherein the Tribunal has held that the requirements under Notification 32/94-C.E. are merely procedural requirements and no more. It has been further observed that in view of th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tand. 4. On a careful consideration of the matter, I notice that the issue is fully covered by the Trade Notices referred to and the citation placed before me. No other dispute has been raised by the department except that the consignee agent was not registered on the date of issue of invoice. It is seen that the consignee agent has since got himself registered as per the certificate dated 2 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
