9911796707
TMI Blog1998 (1) TMI 236X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... The appellants filed this appeal against the order-in-appeal dated 28-1-1997 passed by the Commissioner (Appeals), Central Excise, Allahabad. In the present case, the Modvat credit amounting to Rs. 1,37,126.20 was disallowed under the provision of Rule 57-I and 57U of the Central Excise Rules, 1944. A penalty of Rs. 2,000/- was also imposed under Rule 173Q of the Central Excise Rules, 1944. 2. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... pital goods was denied but no finding was given by the adjudicating authority as well as the Appellate Authority in respect of conveyor belts, welding electrodes and M.S. Rounds. He further submits that the adjudicating authority rejected the claim of the appellants regarding which the transporter s copy was produced on the ground of the contents of the invoices. He submits that there is no allega ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r to allow the benefit of credit on the strength of invoice-cum-challan the undersigned directed the Range Officer to revert back the jurisdictional officer to ascertain the factual position even at the stage of adjudication but the assessee has not made such a request. 5. The plea of the appellants is that they have produced the transporter s copy of the invoices before the adjudicating authori ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tal goods in dispute in the present case though the demand was confirmed. 7. In view of the above discussions, the impugned order is set aside and the matter is remanded back to the jurisdictional adjudicating authority for de novo adjudication after affording an opportunity of personal hearing to the appellants and to pass a speaking order. The appeal is disposed of by way of remand. - - T ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
