9911796707
TMI Blog2002 (1) TMI 977X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the Respondent. [Order]. - The Assistant Commissioner of Central Excise, Ujjain, vide his order dated 30-4-96 disallowed the Modvat credit of Rs. 30,730/- to the appellants on the ground that the party availed Modvat credit of this amount vide E. No. 197, dt. 12-9-95 on the strength of delivery challan-cum-invoices issued from the depot of M/s. Indian Oil Corporation, Baroda. These documents d ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... by the original authority. 3. I have heard Shri Sekhar Vyas, ld. Advocate for the appellants and Shri B.C. Mahey, ld. JDR for the respondents. I have considered the submissions before me. The discrepancies brought out in the order-in-original as well as appellate order and the provisions under the rules as cited in these orders are not in dispute. The ld. Counsel for the appellant, however, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 7GG and the details as required under the aforesaid notifications were also not given in the invoices/challans. In this view of the matter, I do not find much force in the appeal. However, in the facts and circumstances of the case, there appears to be no warrant to impose any penalty on the appellants. Consequently, the penalty of Rs. 3,000/- imposed on the appellants is set aside. The appeal oth ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
