9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (7) TMI 15X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... law was amended to take credit on the basis of the invoice of the registered dealer or other procedures, which was not followed by the appellant and therefore, they were not eligible to take Modvat credit. The other item (xii), Modvat credit is not available on the basis of the documents, not covered under Rule 57G. The ld.Counsel submitted that it is a case of transitional period and therefore, credit should not be denied. I find that the Board had issued various circulars for availment of the credit during the transitional period and the appellant had not followed it. Therefore, they are not entitled to avail the credit. Penalties set aside. Appeal allowed - decided partly in favor of appellant. - E/317/08 - FO/A/76113/2017 - Dated:- 7-4-2017 - Shri P. K. Choudhary, Member (Judicial) Mrs. Supriya Chatterjee, (AR) for the Appellant Shri A.Roy, Supdt.(AR) for the Revenue ORDER Per: Shri P. K. Choudhary The facts of the case in brief are that the appellants are engaged in the manufacture of Printing Ink, Paints and Varnish and Reducers classifiable under chapter 32 38 of the First Schedule to the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985. A Show Cause ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... aken without taking/applying for required permission of competent authority. So, in view of the decision of the Hon ble Punjab Haryana High Court, I do not find any merit in the order of the Commissioner(Appeals). Accordingly, the impugned order is set-aside and the appeal is allowed with consequential relief. Reliance is also placed on the following judgements: - COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE, LUDHIANA VS. RALSON INDIA LTD. 2006 (202) ELT 759 (P H), [Para-9, 10, 11] - COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE, COMMISSIONERATE-I VS. LUDHIANA BEVERAGES LTD. 2001 (134) ELT 349 (P H)[Para-51] (iii) Credit taken on Original copy of the invoice after lapse of six months The appellant submitted the copies of the said invoices in the paper book along with the photocopy of the relevant pages of the RG23A Part-II register for the relevant invoices. It can be seen that all t he said credit has been taken well within the time limit of six months. (iv) Credit taken on the original copy of challan/S.T. challan The said allegation has been made in respect of 12 invoices, out of which 11 relate to the semi-finished goods, manufactured in another factory of the Appellant a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 97 (96) E.L.T. 606 (Jenny Plywood Industries Ltd.) in respect of its contention that non-preauthentication of invoices was a minor and rectifiable defect and the credit cannot be disallowed on the ground of the same. Similarly in respect of the other invoices it was held that the same clearly show their status of being duplicate and merely because the other expressions were also printed on the invoices which were scored, cannot be made the basis for denying them the credit. Reference was also drawn to Notification No.77/99-C.E. (N.T.), dated 9-2-99 introducing sub-rule (11) to Rule 57G and the Circular No. 441/7/99-CX., dated 23-2-99 issued by the Central Board of Excise Customs clarifying that the Modvat credit should not be disallowed on procedural grounds. The said circular was taken note of by the Larger Bench decision of the Tribunal in the case of Kamakhya Steels Pvt. Ltd. v. CCE 2000 (121) E.L.T. 247 (Tri.) = 2000 (40) RLT 575. (vi) Credit taken on endorsed invoice All the invoices were issued immediately after switch from the gate pass system to the invoice system during the period April, May and June, 1994. Two of the invoices related to the transf ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... thout raising any kind of allegation of irregularities. Further in some of the invoices no printing as to 'Original' or 'Duplicate' has been made and there cannot be any scope treating those invoices as other copies. Whereas in some cases no tick mark has been made although the printing 'Original', Buyer's copy has been made on the invoices. Denial of credit for rest of the aforesaid category we make the similar submission and in view of the clarification given by the Government dated 23-02-199 (supra), credit cannot be denied under the circumstances which do not contemplate any substantial non-co mpliance of the MODVAT rules. Accordingly we pray to allow the entire credit that has been disallowed on the aforesaid issues. (viii) Full particulars/debit particulars not available. Since they used to pay duty at the end of the day, the col. as regards debit entry particulars of PLA/RG23A was not required to be filled up in their case. Further in case of another invoice issued by the depot of M/s.CIBA Geigi Ltd. the invoice particulars of the factory were given. The remaining invoices of other suppliers the debit entry serial number of payment ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... above synopsis of the ld.Counsel, I am unable to agree with the Sl.No.VII, full particulars/debit particulars not available. It is noted that the supplier of the input had not given the details of payment of duty and debit particulars and therefore there is no basis for availing credit. Similarly, (Sl.No.ix), where the appellant is not the consignee, Modvat credit is not available. It is noted that after introduction of invoice system, the endorsed invoices cannot be accepted. In any event, further, Sl.No.x, credit taken on endorsed Bill of Entry after 01.04.94, I find that the law was amended to take credit on the basis of the invoice of the registered dealer or other procedures, which was not followed by the appellant and therefore, they were not eligible to take Modvat credit. 6. The other item (xii), Modvat credit is not available on the basis of the documents, not covered under Rule 57G. The ld.Counsel submitted that it is a case of transitional period and therefore, credit should not be denied. I find that the Board had issued various circulars for availment of the credit during the transitional period and the appellant had not followed it. Therefore, they are not entitled ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
