9911796707
TMI Blog2004 (12) TMI 608X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... by the tanker, was lost on the way. The lower authorities have found fault with the F.I.R. which was lodged at Delhi on the ground that the goods were being transported from Surat to Hoshiarpur then why F.I.R. was lodged at Delhi. The other ground for denying the Modvat credit was that the Assistant Commissioner stated in his order that the appellants; took credit on 30-6-1999 and applied for availment of credit on 27-7-1998 enclosing copy of affidavit, dated 22-6-1998 of the driver of the vehicle. Shri Rupendra Singh, learned Advocate, pleaded that on coming to the notice of the loss, F.I.R. was lodged immediately at Delhi and Superintendent of the Range was also informed on 22-6-1998 about the loss of duplicate copy. Subsequently, they ap ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... duplicate copy has been lost in transit, he could take credit on the basis of the original copy of the invoice provided he satisfies the Assistant Collector about the loss of the duplicate copy. He stated that the Trade Notice issued by the Chandigarh Collectorate was not followed by the appellants and hence the Assistant Commissioner was not satisfied about the loss of the duplicate copy. 4.Shri Rupendra Singh, learned Advocate referred to para 10 of the decision of the Larger Bench in the case of C.C.E., New Delhi v. Avis Electronics Pvt. Ltd. (supra) wherein it was held that In Appeal No. E/410/98-NB, manufacturer requested that they be allowed to take credit on the basis of the original copy of the invoice on the ground that the dup ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... om the date of taking the credit and the affidavit filed by the driver does; not show vehicle number, therefore, the credit was denied. I find that in the appeal petition it is mentioned that appellants followed the Trade Notice 111/94 of Chandigarh Commissionerate as they informed the range Superintendent about the loss of duplicate copy of invoice on 22-6-1998. They sought permission of Assistant Commissioner for credit on 22-7-1998. Affidavit regarding loss of duplicate copy of invoice was filed. I find the affidavit shows the invoice number which was lost. If the Assistant Commissioner had noted that vehicle number is not shown in affidavit which could have been included then he could have called for fresh affidavit showing vehicle numb ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
