9911796707
TMI Blog2004 (8) TMI 564X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... .G. Chacko, Member (J) (Oral)]. Both these appeals, one by the assessee and the other by the Revenue, are against the same order of the Commissioner of Central Excise. There is no representation for the assessee despite notice, nor any request of theirs for adjournment. We have examined the records and heard ld. SDR. 2. In the impugned order, ld. Commissioner denied Modvat credit of Rs. 21 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... WDIL due to breakdown of the carrier AP 13T 3785. After the repair of the said vehicle, the said Diesel Engine was again cleared from WDIL under Invoice No. 52/6-3-1995, declaring that the duty had already been paid vide Invoice No. 51/28-2-1995. The said Diesel Engine was again taken back to WDIL as it had fallen down due to road accident. WDIL had then dismantled the Diesel Engine and with the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... pital goods was not admissible where the goods were never received in the factory of the party seeking to avail the credit. This argument of the ld. SDR is based on the text of Rule 57Q of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 and we have to accept the same. Rule 57Q allowed Modvat credit of duty paid on eligible capital goods only where the goods were used for manufacture of final products in the factor ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... equivalent amount of duty was collected by the assessee from Insurance Company by undertaking that they would not be claiming Modvat credit of the duty paid on the cost of repairs of the goods as invoiced in invoice No. 3 dated 27-4-1996. It appears from records that the assessee had got reimbursement of excise duty of Rs. 21,42,582/- covered by Invoice No. 3/27-4-1996 from the Insurance Company b ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
