9911796707
TMI Blog2001 (2) TMI 380X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... or the Respondent. [Order]. - Appellants filed these appeals against order-in-appeal passed by the Commissioner (Appeals). 2. Brief facts of the case are that appellants are engaged in the manufacture of Motor Vehicle parts and were availing the benefit of MODVAT credit. A show cause notice was issued to the appellants for recovery of MODVAT credit and for imposition of penalty on the gro ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... by the proper officer on 19-7-1994 without any objection. He submits that the goods received from M/s. Steel Tubes of India Ltd., Ludhiana were defected and the appellants on 17-10-1994, wrote a letter to the Assistant Commissioner of Central Excise, Faridabad, informing him for removal of inputs under Rule 57F of the Central Excise Rules and also filed the classification list showing the rate of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... o Mohan Singh and he requested the adjudicating authority to call for Mohan Singh for cross-examination and the adjudicating authority without examining Mohan Singh passed the impugned orders. 6. He further submits that the appellants under bona fide belief availed the credit with due intimation to the Revenue and after giving the due intimation, the goods were returned to the manufacturer o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... xcise Rules on the ground that appellants availed the benefit of credit on the basis of forged invoices. The credit was taken on 17-6-1994 and 28-6-1994 in RG-23A Part II and appellants filed RT-12 Return on 5-7-1994 and the same was duly assessed by the proper officer. Thereafter, appellants vide letter dated 17-10-1994, informed the Assistant Commissioner for removal of the inputs as such and fi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
