1999 (7) TMI 135

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ment s appeal against the impugned order dated 19-5-1998 of Commissioner (Appeals) praying for setting aside the same. 1. The facts of the case in brief are that the Respondent is engaged in the manufacture of S.O. Dyes falling under Chapter 32 of CETA, 1985 and avails benefit of Modvat credit. Respondent wrongfully availed Modvat credit of Rs. 62,000/- on capital goods without filing declaratio .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... Excise Rules, and Departmental clarification based on CBEC letter F. No. 267/86-CX, Stated 7-9-1996 under Rule 57T(1) and 1998 (102) E.L.T. (Tribunal) in the case of Konark Cylinders Containers Pvt. Ltd. v. C.C.E., Bhubaneswar. Modvat declaration under Rule 57G(5) of Central Excise Rules (para 6) dated 23-10-1997. Heard both sides. 3. From the grounds in appeal memorandum it is seen that the .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... s not filed. In this case, it is not the case of not filing declaration, as per the contention of both sides. According to respondent it was filed on 27-4-1994 but not under Rule 57T(1), but under Rule 57Q. As per the appellant it was filed on 21-11-1994, 20 days after receipt of goods; without any explanation, and condonation application is filed on 13-10-1995 after the personal hearing on 10-10- .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X