TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2001 (2) TMI 452
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....]. - The appellants manufactured Electric Panel and Board falling under Chapter 85 of Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985. They availed Modvat credit of Rs. 78,053/- during the period from October, 1994 to December, 1994 on the strength of invoices issued by the traders/dealers. They were issued a show cause notice dated 6-3-1995 calling upon them to show cause why the aforesaid amount should not be....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....confirmed the demand of Rs. 67,462.37 under Rule 57-I on the party but vacated the demand of Rs. 10,590.63/-. 3. The party filed an appeal but the Commissioner (Appeals), Chandigarh dismissed their appeal vide his order dated 13-6-2000 upholding the order passed by the lower authority. 4. The present appeal is against the above order of Commissioner (Appeals). I have heard Shri Gagan K....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ppellants was less and correspondingly the duty credit taken should also have been reduced. Another amount of Rs. 17,913.32 in respect of the invoices at Sl. Nos. 7, 8 and 9 of the Annexure to the notice has been denied on the grounds that the assessable value in the particulars of the manufacturers has not been given and the dealer has supplied part of the quantities to the party. It is observed ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....d in the dealer's invoice, the authorities should have denied the differential amount of Modvat credit availed in excess and not the whole amount of credit. 5. I have considered the above submissions. In my view the findings of the original authority in her order are quite exhaustive and speaking. She has given detailed findings and the grounds on which the Modvat credit has been held to be ....