9911796707
TMI Blog2004 (12) TMI 433X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... dent. [Order]. Shri Raj Kumar, C.A. appearing for the appellants pleaded that the appellants were denied the Modvat credit of Rs. 47,738/- on the ground (i) that the credit was taken by the appellants for which RG 23A Part-I was not maintained, (ii) the goods were clandestinely removed and for which certificate under Rule 57E(2) of the Rules cannot be granted and (iii) the certificate wa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... have made entries only when certificate under Rule 57E was issued to them. Before that since; they have not taken any credit, they had not made any entry in RG 23A Part-I register. Regarding non-application of sub-rule (2) of Rule 57E, he stated that no show cause notice was ever issued to the manufacturer of the inputs for clandestine clearance. He stated that the appellants were clearing the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... dit crtificate by the authority who issued the same :- (1) Ashok Organic Industries Ltd. v. CCE, Vadodara - 2004 (166) E.L.T. 403 (Tri.-Mumbai) (2) Jindal Iron Steel Company Ltd. v. CCE, Thane-II - 2004 (164) E.L.T. 294 (3) Hydraulics Pvt. Ltd. v. CCE, New Delhi - 2003 (158) E.L.T. 84 (4) Steelco Gujarat Ltd. v. CC LCE (Appeals), Vadodara - 2003 (157) E.L.T. 113 (5) ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of credit. The first ground is that supplementary certificate cannot be issued under Rule 57E(2) of the Rules and (ii) that the appellants have not maintained RG 23A Part-I for the said goods. Since the Superintendent has issued certificate of payment of duty, therefore, the Commissioner (Appeals) was not required to go beyond the certificate and come to a different conclusion. The certificate ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
