9911796707
TMI Blog1997 (12) TMI 421X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... payable @ 5% ad valorem after taking into consideration slab exemption for SSI units. On account of a clerical error and oversight, the item was cleared at 10% ad valorem i.e. 5% ad valorem in excess of the duty due and leviable on the product during the month of April, 1995 on 1-4-1995 under the cover of Invoice Nos. 1, 2 and 3 and on 3-4-1995 under the cover of Invoice Nos. 4, 5 and 6. On finding this error on their own, the appellants issued credit notes to their respective consignees of the goods on 6-4-1995 itself and simultaneously made adjustment entry in the RG 23A Part II by taking the credit of the duty paid in excess to the tune of Rs. 1193/- vide Entry No. 32, dated 5-4-1995. The authorities below have, however, disallowed the s ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the attested stamp is still clear indicated that it was duly authenticated invoices of the manufacturers of the goods. Thus, this invoice is valid. It was also his submission that the learned Commissioner has erroneously referred to Rule 57A in this regard as such invoices are valid for the purpose of Modvat in terms of Rule 57G. The invoices having been issued by the depot of the manufacturer or registered dealers are covered by the Board s order under Rule 57G. 6. Learned DR drew attention towards the impugned order-in-original and order-in-appeal and reiterated the Department s view as contained therein. However, he further very fairly added that the assessees taking credit of Rs. 1193/- suo moto by correcting the error was in the na ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the competent authority in the normal course. In view of the above position, the authorities below have erred in disallowing the benefit. 9. Insofar as the second amount of Rs. 40,500/- is concerned, I observe that there is no dispute regarding the duty paid character of the goods or their receipt in the appellants factory or their being declared inputs for the purpose of use in the manufacture of declared outputs. There is also no dispute that the invoice in question had been issued from the depot and bears the printed mark to the effect `duplicate for transporter for taking Modvat credit and for removal of excisable goods under Rule 57G and also bears the attested stamp of Ficom Organics Limited, New Delhi. It is also not in dispute ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
