9911796707
TMI Blog2006 (9) TMI 46X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... alf of the respondents. 2.The Respondents are registered Central Excise units and engaged in the manufacture of Copper Copper Alloy Products, Zinc Products, Tin Products Copper and articles thereof falling under Chapter 74,79 80 of Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985 where availing Modvat facility. Based upon certain seizure in Sept., 93 and detailed investigations carried out by the officers of Division X, a number of irregularities and misuse of Modvat facility by the aforementioned units were detected and a show cause notice issued in May, 1995. It was, inter alia, alleged in the Show Cause Notice that M/s. MTL and M/s. MEL have availed excess Modvat credit deemed credit no available them and in certain cases also they availed of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... shown, for example a quantity of 3000 kgs. of copper rods initially dispatched to M/s. Mahavir Metal, Bombay was changed to 300.00 kgs. by introducing a decimal point in the excise records once the goods are received in Bombay as informed as on phone with suitable instructions. Thus, there was evasion on 2700 kgs. of the goods. The details of such forged documents are in Annexure B(X) of the Show Cause Notice. 3.The assessee in their reply, inter alia, submitted that they had purchased material from M/s. Mahavir Metal Inds. At their Mumbai office, under their endorsement in original GP.1 it was not possible to say the GP-1's were forged documents. They had also taken credit of a lasser amount than what was mentioned in the GP-1 on basis ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n tempered with. However, we find that there is no dispute to the finding of the adjudicating authority that the respondent had received the quantity as reflected in the gate pass and have taken the credit to that extent only. There is no dispute that the said quantity received by the respondent was duty paid. If the supplier of the inputs have clandestinely cleared more material than what was reflected in the gate pass or have used the same gate pass for double clearances, action is required to be taken at their end. Inasmuch as, admittedly, the appellant have received the inputs and have taken the credit to the extent of the quantity of inputs received by them, the Modvat credit cannot be denied to them. As such, we find no merits in the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
