Case Laws
Acts
Notifications
Circulars
Classification
Forms
Manuals
Articles
News
D. Forum
Highlights
Notes
🚨 Important Update for Our Users
We are transitioning to our new and improved portal - www.taxtmi.com - for a better experience.
⚠️ This portal will be fully migrated on 31-July-2025 at 23:59:59
After this date, all services will be available exclusively on our new platform.
If you encounter any issues or problems while using the new portal,
please let us know
via our feedback form
, with specific details, so we can address them promptly.
Home
2002 (9) TMI 516 - AT - Central Excise
Issues:
Error apparent in passing the final order regarding Modvat credit based on the xerox copy of the triplicate copy of the bill of entry without producing the triplicate copy itself. Analysis: The respondents filed a miscellaneous application pointing out an error in the final order where the Tribunal allowed the department's appeal due to Modvat credit not being allowed based on a xerox copy of the triplicate copy of the bill of entry without producing the triplicate copy itself. The respondents had earlier moved a miscellaneous application seeking a hearing for the production of the original triplicate bill of entry, which was dismissed. However, upon reviewing the final order, they found an error in the Tribunal's decision. The respondents argued that they had indeed produced the original triplicate copy of the bill of entry to obtain credit, which was required at multiple plants, hence only a xerox copy was filed. The original and appellate authorities had confirmed the production of the triplicate copy at all relevant places, supporting the respondents' claim for Modvat credit. The respondents emphasized that the triplicate copy of the bill of entry was filed for record purposes as there was only one bill of entry covering consignments for various factories, and keeping the bill of entry at the Head Office was necessary. Both authorities had allowed Modvat credit based on this practice. The Tribunal, after examining the case records and the triplicate copy of the bill of entry produced in court, found the error apparent on the face of the record. Consequently, the Tribunal recalled the final order and rejected the appeal filed by the Revenue, affirming the respondents' entitlement to Modvat credit based on the production of the triplicate copy of the bill of entry. In conclusion, the Tribunal rectified the error in the final order and upheld the respondents' claim for Modvat credit based on the production of the original triplicate copy of the bill of entry, dismissing the Revenue's appeal.
|