9911796707
TMI Blog2002 (9) TMI 516X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ous application the respondents assessee in the above matter have filed an ROM application pointing out that an error apparent has occurred in passing the Final Order No. 673/01, dated 11-5-2001 by which the Tribunal had allowed the appeal of the department on the ground that Modvat cannot be allowed on the basis of xerox copy of triplicate copy of bill of entry without production of the triplicat ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ellate authority had allowed the benefit of Modvat on the basis of xerox copy of triplicate copy of bill of entry which is not correct. Ld. Counsel submitted that this finding has led to an error apparent on the face of the record and it is in these circumstances the respondents are moving an application under Section 35D(2) of the Central Excise Act, 1944 on the following among other grounds :- ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... well as the appellate authority that the Respondent have shown the triplicate copy of the bill of entry at all the places and submitted xerox copies and therefore it cannot be argued that the documents required have not been produced. The Assistant Commissioner of Central Excise has also verified the duty paid nature. 3. The respondents further submitted to peruse the triplicate copy of the bill ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s apparent in the face of the record is required to be rectified and the appeal filed by the revenue deserves to be rejected. 4. Ld. DR Shri C. Mani reiterated the stand taken by the Department. 5. I have carefully gone through the case records. The triplicate copy of the bill of entry dated 15-9-1995 which was produced by the ld. Counsel in the open court and after verifying the triplicate co ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
