9911796707
TMI Blog2003 (8) TMI 422X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the Respondent. [Order]. Examined the records and heard both the sides. The lower authorities denied Modvat credit of Rs. 86,940/- to the appellants in respect of certain inputs received from M/s. Indian Petrochemicals Corporation Ltd. (IPCCL) on the ground that the credit was taken on the basis of invalid document. The above credit was taken by the appellants on the basis of a photocopy ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... als Ltd. v. CCE [2003 (159) E.L.T. 1118 (Tribunal) = 1996 (62) ECR 326] (2) Meenakshi Polymers v. CCE, New Delhi [1996 (87) E.L.T. 492] (3) CCE, New Delhi v. Mohta Electro Steel [1999 (32) RLT 199] (4) Dhaulagiree Polyolefin Pvt. Ltd. v. CCE, Calcutta [2002 (147) E.L.T. 843] 2. The DR reiterates the findings of the original and first appellate authorities and submits that the d ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ever, enabled the manufacturer of final product to use the original copy of invoice for the purpose in the event of loss in transit of the duplicate copy. There was no provision governing a situation in which both the original and duplicate copies were lost in transit. These submissions are not contested. The appellants claim is based on the aforecited decisions as also a certificate issued by th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ansit and such loss was proved to the satisfaction of the jurisdictional Assistant Commissioner of Central Excise. Rule 57G did not at all contemplate the use of triplicate copy of invoice, let alone photocopy thereof, for the purpose of availment of Modvat credit. A Larger Bench of this Tribunal, in the case of Avis Electronics (supra) held that, where the rule prescribed a specific procedure for ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
