2004 (12) TMI 515

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... Chattopadhyay, Consultant for Appellant and Shri T.K. Kar, SDR for Respondent. Prima facie the case is in favour of the appellant. Therefore, I dispense with the condition of pre-deposit and heard the appeal. Mr. Chattopadhyay submits that the appellants sent the material to the job workers under Rule 57F(4) of the said rules as it existed during the material period. As per rule, the goods were t .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... he favour of appellant or he has to give the detail order for refusal of such permission. No such order was passed by the Assistant Commissioner. Therefore, he submits that the Modvat credit should not be denied on the basis of such procedural lapse. Learned SDR supports the order passed by the Commissioner of Appeals and Order-in-Original. 2. Rule 57F(3A) permits the Assistant Commissioner to e .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... refusal but no such order was ever passed by the Assistant Commissioner which was obligatory on the part of Assistant Commissioner to pass such order. In present case the material were received after 60 days and it cannot be said that the credit was not admissible to them especially when the Assistant Commissioner has power to condone such delay. These are benevolent provisions to reduce the effe .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X