9911796707
TMI Blog1997 (12) TMI 266X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... By the impugned Order-in-Original dated 21-3-1995 Collector of Central Excise, Chandigarh disallowed Modvat credit of Rs. 12,12,585/- availed by the appellants apart from imposing a penalty of Rs.1 lakh on them. 2. The short question raised in the Appeal is the admissibility of original invoices as duty paying documents for purposes of Modvat credit after the amendment of Rule 52A of the C ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ty not imposed. 5. The matter was adjudicated by the Collector who found against the appellants. Hence the present Appeal. 6. Shri Shiv Das, ld. Advocate appearing for the appellants before us submitted that credit has been denied to them on a mere technical point of the invoice copies on which credit had been taken being original copies thereof and not duplicated copies. He drew attention to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... its amendment with effect from 1-4-1994 had in sub-rule (3) provided for the original, duplicate, triplicate and quadruplicate copies thereof and laid down the purpose for which each copy of the invoice was to be used. In clause (ii) of sub-rule (3) of Rule 52A it had been clearly provided that it was the Duplicate copy for the transporter that has to be used for taking credit under Rule 57G and ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... egard to this fact it cannot be contended with any force that since Rule 57G itself has not spelt out specifically as to which copy of the invoice is to be taken as the valid duty paying document for purposes of taking Modvat credit, all copies of the invoice or any of the four copies would have equal validity. When the proviso to Rule 57G(2) refers to invoice issued under Rule 52A the reference ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
