Home Case Index All Cases Central Excise Central Excise + AT Central Excise - 2000 (9) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2000 (9) TMI 147 - AT - Central Excise
Issues:
1. Denial of Modvat credit for unsigned invoice. 2. Denial of Modvat credit for unauthenticated invoices by second stage dealer. Analysis: 1. The first issue pertains to the denial of Modvat credit amounting to Rs. 78,750/- due to an unsigned invoice issued by M/s. Vinyl Chemical Industries. The Assistant Commissioner held that the invoice was not valid for credit under Rule 57G as the signatures did not match, even though it was later signed by the authorized person. However, the Tribunal found that since the invoice was eventually signed by the authorized signatory, the credit cannot be denied solely on the grounds of signature mismatch. Consequently, the order denying the credit was set aside, and the appeal related to this credit amount was allowed. 2. The second issue involves the denial of Modvat credit amounting to Rs. 1,19,600/- for invoices issued by M/s. Oswal Cable Products, a second stage dealer, which were not authenticated by the Central Excise Officer as required under Rule 57G. The appellants argued that M/s. Oswal Cable Products should be considered first stage dealers, not second stage dealers as held by the authorities. However, the Tribunal observed that based on the sales chain and evidence, M/s. Oswal Cable Products indeed acted as second stage dealers and should have had their invoices authenticated. The Tribunal remanded the matter back to the Assistant Commissioner, instructing the appellants to get the invoices authenticated within two months for the credit to be allowed after verification. 3. In conclusion, the Tribunal allowed the appeal related to the Modvat credit of Rs. 78,750/- and remanded the matter concerning the Modvat credit of Rs. 1,19,600/- for further authentication by the proper Central Excise Officer. The appellants were directed to rectify the discrepancy by getting the invoices authenticated within the specified timeframe to avail the credit. Upon compliance with this directive, the Assistant Commissioner was instructed to allow the credit after due verification, thereby disposing of the appeal accordingly.
|