2006 (1) TMI 385

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... The appellants, M/s. Om Textiles, had received a consignment of PVC Coated Man Made Fabrics in respect of which they took Modvat credit. The Department noticed that the address indicated on the invoice showed M/s. Om Textiles, Mumbai, instead of the consignees address at New Delhi. A show cause notice was issued to them asking them why the credit should not be denied. The documents being invalid, .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... arty at Mumbai, although by name as that of appellants. He points out that nowhere in the show cause notice, the fact that goods were received was questioned by the Department. 3. The learned Authorised Departmental Representative (ADR), contends that the appellants have been given adequate opportunity to prove that the invoice was not invalid by producing documentary evidences, such as, transpo .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... address was challenged before the supply of goods and the same invoice was accepted to be valid. Adopting the same ratio in the present case also, the invoice can be taken as a valid invoice keeping in view the circumstances. To support his point, he also relies upon the Board s Circular No. 441/7/99-CX., dated 23-2-1999 which directs that the Asstt. Commissioner of Central Excise who ignored mino .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X