9911796707
TMI Blog2007 (1) TMI 442X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s and perused the record. 2. This appeal is filed by the appellant for denial of Modvat credit of Rs. 1,93,413/- availed on the strength of photocopy of the triplicate copy of the bill of entry and the Modvat credit was availed after a period of 6 months in violation of Rule 57G of the Central Excise Rules, 1944. 3. The learned Advocate on behalf of the appellant submits that the Central Board ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e appellant as evident from the letter dated 10-7-1996 which was duly endorsed by the Customs authorities. He relied upon the following decisions : 1. Emmes Metal Pvt. Ltd. v. CCE, Mumbai, 2003 (161) E.L.T. 1041 (Tri. - Mumbai). 2. Marmagoa Steel Ltd. v. Union of India, 2005 (192) E.L.T. 82 (Bom.). 4. The learned D.R. reiterates the findings of the Commissioner (Appeals). He submits that ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... months from the date of issue of bill of entry is not sustainable. Further, the appellant in reply to the show cause notice made a categorical stand that they produced the triplicate copy of the bill of entry and was shown to the Departmental officers and as advised by them, it was sent to the supplier for endorsement. It is revealed from the letter dated 10-7-1996 that this bill of entry was con ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d being filed, they will be allowed to avail the credit which they have already taken. Miscellaneous application is disposed of in the above terms. 6. In view of the above, the impugned orders are set aside and the adjudicating authority is directed to examine the documents placed by the appellants and to decide the matter in the light of the decision of the Tribunal in the case of Emmes Metal ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
