TMI Blog2003 (10) TMI 59X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... against the Department in CEC 173 of 2002, it will not serve any useful purpose in remitting the case back to the Tribunal with a direction to refer the question of law which according to us arises from the order of the Tribunal. The question which arises from the order of Tribunal already stands answered by this Court in favour of assessee in the aforesaid case. The question of law which arises ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... supplier issued the invoices certifying therein that it had discharged its liability in regard to the payment of excise duty. When the invoices were sent for verification, it transpired that the supplier had not discharged the due liability fixed under Section 3A of the aforesaid Act. In this view of the matter, the adjudicating authority disallowed deemed Modvat credit amounting to Rs. 1,73,669/- ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ad been claimed by the assessee but the same was disallowed by the adjudicating authority solely on the ground that a certificate from the jurisdictional Range Officer showing that the inputs had suffered excise duty had not been produced. This order was upheld by the Commissioner in Appeal. Feeling aggrieved by the disallowance, the assessee filed an appeal before the Tribunal which has reversed ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... find no ground to issue the mandamus prayed for." 3. In that case the Tribunal had taken a contrary view and this Court had upheld the same holding that the deemed Modvat credit can be claimed in terms of Notification No. 58/97 and that the only requirement of the notification is that the assessee should produce the invoices covering the goods in which the manufacturer should give a declaration ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
