9911796707
TMI Blog2003 (4) TMI 126X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... otification No. 33/94-C.E., dated 4-7-94, whereas the Tribunal has allowed the credit on the basis of particulars shown on the dealer's invoice other than the above." 2.Respondent No. 1 is engaged in the manufacture of PVC rigid pipes and parts thereof falling under Chapter sub-heading 3917 of the Schedule to the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985. It has been availing Modvat credit under Rule 57A of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 (for short, the "Rules"). In the year 1994, respondent No. 1 availed Modvat credit of Rs. 4,02,324/- on the strength of invoices issued by registered dealers. Additional Commissioner (Technical), Central Excise Department, Chandigarh issued show cause notice dated 23-2-1995 to respondent No. 1 proposing to recover ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 8 of the Annexure A to show cause notice do not contain the assessable value and time of issue of invoices by the manufacturers of such goods. In the absence of assessable value of the goods cleared by the manufacturers these invoices cannot be considered as valid document in terms of Notification No. 33/94-C.E. (N.T.), dated 4-7-94 for availing Modvat credit under Rule 57G of the Rules. Thus Modvat credit of Rs. 3,40,704/- taken on the invoices at Sr. Nos. 1 to 5 and 8 of said Annexure is not allowable. Regarding the invoices at Sr. Nos. 6 and 7 of said Annexure, it is seen that it is not clear in the invoices as to which unit of M/s. National Organic Chemical Industries has discharged the duty on such goods, in the absence of which the du ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nt." 4.Appeal filed by respondent No. 1 was dismissed by the Commissioner (Appeals) with the observation that in the absence of complete name/ address of the manufacturer, the invoices cannot be considered as valid document for availing Modvat credit. However, Customs, Excise and Gold (Control) Appellate Tribunal, New Delhi (for short, "the Tribunal") reversed the orders passed by Additional Commissioner (Technical) and Commissioner (Appeals) and held as under : "I have perused the invoice in question namely invoice Nos. 1 to 5 and 8 and I see substance in the contention of the appellant that columns 4 and 5 in the invoices show assessable value after giving trade discount. The duty payment is also clearly shown on these invoices. The n ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
