2004 (7) TMI 552

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... cted against the order passed by the Commissioner (Appeals), whereby their claim for Modvat credit was denied. The credit was denied on the ground that, duty paying documents namely, the bill of entry (B/E) has no endorsement in appellant s favour. The appellants pleaded that, the import was originally made by one M/s. Gujarat Petrosynthese Ltd., who had sold the materials to M/s. Multichem Pvt. L .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ndorsed in appellant s favour by the importer by M/s. Gujarat Petrosynthese Ltd. 4. Ld. DR brought to my notice that, the adjudicating authority did comment on this fact and in the order-in-original, it has been noted that duty was paid on the goods on 11-8-93 and the importer M/s. Gujarat Petrosynthese Ltd., made the sale to M/s. Multichem Pvt. Ltd., only on 8-9-93 and further sale by M/s. Mult .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ts have been received in the appellants factory. Therefore, substantial right of Modvat credit cannot be denied even if the duty paying documents contains deficiency. 6. I note that, since the basic fact of receipt of duty paid goods and their utilisation in the manufacture of final goods are not in dispute and also, there is no allegation that duty paying documents had gone into the hands of so .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X