9911796707
TMI Blog2000 (10) TMI 371X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ion, for the Respondents. [Order]. - In this Case, the Asstt. Commissioner of Central Excise, Alwar Division vide his Order dated 5-8-1996 confirmed a demand of Rs. 12,136/- under Rule 57-I on the Respondents and imposed a penalty of Rs. 500/- on them under Rule 173Q(1)(bb). This action is taken against the Respondents on the ground that they availed Modvat credit of duty paid on the goods rece ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s. In some of the cases, the lower authorities had allowed Modvat credit in the similar circumstances observing that the manufacturer cannot be denied credit for a bona fide mistake committed by the dealer. Accordingly, the appellate authority set aside the order passed by the lower authority and allowed the appeal. 3. The Revenue is in appeal against the above order of the Commissioner (Ap ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... is contended that the dealer was not authorised to issue invoices under Rule 57GG. If that is the case, it is felt imperative that the dealer who had passed on the Modvat credit to the appellants should have been made a party to the proceedings. So long as there is no discrepancy in the documents on the strength of which the present appellants have availed the Modvat credit, the same cannot be de ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
