9911796707
TMI Blog2003 (6) TMI 362X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... R, for the Respondent. [Order per : V.K. Agrawal, Member (T)]. M/s. Amrapali Industries Limited have filed the present appeals challenging confirmation of penalty against them by the Commissioner (Appeals), under the impugned Order. 2. Shri Jitendra Singh, learned Advocate, submitted that the Appellants manufacture texturised yarn out of POY obtained on payment of duty; that they were ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... has rejected their appeals. The learned Advocate, further, submitted that no penalty is imposable for a lapse which is purely procedural in nature; that the lapse of not filing the declaration under Rule 57G had occurred only because of their bona fide belief that permission for Proforma Credit having been granted, no further declaration was required to be filed; that they were filing RT 12 retur ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d Modvat Credit was same and only name differed. 3. Countering the arguments, Shri U. Raja Ram, learned JDR, reiterated the findings as contained in both the Orders passed by the lower authorities. 4. We have considered the submissions of both the sides. It is not disputed by Revenue that the Appellants had filed an application for availing of Proforma Credit of duty paid on POY and used in or ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e 57G. In similar situation, we find that this Tribunal in the case of Indian Rayon Industries Limited, supra, has held that Both the type of schemes i.e. Proforma Credit and Modvat Credit allowed the assessees to take the credit of duty paid on inputs or the raw materials used in the manufacture of the final product. As such the Additional Commissioner has rightly observed that the irregularit ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
