9911796707
TMI Blog2004 (1) TMI 584X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . This order will dispose of the above captioned appeals, which have been filed against two impugned order-in-appeals, as the issue involved is common. 2. The appellants were late in filing the declarations under Rule 57T in respect of capital goods, by approximately one month in all. The adjudicating authority while allowing the Modvat credit on those goods, passed the following one line ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ants for late filing or non-filing of declaration, stands covered by the ratio of law laid down by the Larger Bench, in Kamakhya Steels (P) Ltd. v. CCE, Meerut - 2000 (121) E.L.T. 247 and also in JBM Tools Ltd. v. CCE, Pune - 2002 (144) E.L.T. 561. On the other hand, the learned SDR has reiterated the correctness of the impugned order of the Commissioner (Appeals). She has contended that it could ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ants for the condonation of delay in submitting the declarations, in the order-in-original. He has also not referred to the sufficient cause pleaded by the appellants, much less about his own satisfaction for condoning the delay. From his one line order reproduced above, it is difficult to observe/hold that there was a sufficient cause and he satisfied himself about that cause pleaded before him b ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... in Kamakhya Steels (P) Ltd. (supra) wherein it has been observed that after the amendment of Rules 57G and T, an assessee will be entitled to the Modvat credit if other conditions are satisfied, even if defective or no declaration had been filed. But this contention was never raised before the authorities below. Since the case is being sent back to the Assistant Commissioner for having not passed ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
