9911796707
TMI Blog2003 (8) TMI 314X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Modvat dealer, under Rule 57-I of the C.E. Rules, 1944 read with Section 11D of the C.E. Act, 1944 and imposing penalty of Rs. 10,000/- under Rule 173Q(1)(bbb) for non-observance of procedure and passing irregular Modvat credit. 2. The facts of the case, in brief, are that the appellants, being a registered dealer purchased "Polyester Twisted Dyed Yarn" from M/s. Regal Criptex Ltd., Silvasa, entered the credit in their RG-23D register and passed on the credit to their customer. On scrutiny of the mother invoices, it was also written thereon as "Being sent for dying to M/s. Criplon Yarns, Vapi for dying, on behalf of the buyer". It has been alleged that dealers have no provision to get their goods processed by job workers and dyeing of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... and gave reference of M/s. Regal's invoices in the invoice issued by them for payment of duty on processing. Invoice-wise quantity of yarn and payment of duty are tabled below for the sake of brevity :- Regal's Invoice No. and Date Qty. of Yarn in Kgs. Duty (Rs.) Crimplon's Invoice No. and Date Qty. of Yarn in Kgs. Duty on Processing (Rs.) Basic (6/- per Kg.) AED 15% on Basic 732-24-2-98 700.300 15,620 2,343 282-9-3-98 2276.920 13,661.50 2,049.20 734-25-2-98 787.220 17,559 2,634 746-03-3-98 789.400 17,608 2,641 706-17-2-98 720.810 16,078 2,412 277-6-3-98 4028.040 24,168.25 3,625.25 718-20-2-98 712.510 15,893 2,384 722-21-2-98 712.650 15,896 2,384 723-21-2-98 720.770 16,077 2,412 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... or job work is baseless, because proper Central Excise duty was paid on the duty paid polyester yarns consignment for dyeing the said goods by M/s. Crimplon before sending the goods to them. Therefore the question of following the procedure of processing the inputs by job work under Rule 57F(4) read with Notification No. 214/86, dated 25-3-86 does not arise in this case. 4. In the impugned order the Asstt. Commr. has observed that there is no provisions in Central Excise Law for the dealer to send the goods for further processing on job work basis. Moreover the appellants could not produce any document evidencing proof of payment of duty on dyeing. The dealer sold 'dyed yarn' but they could not produce any document showing payment of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... authority has ignored the fact of payment of duty on dying of the yarn which has been done as per the provisions of the Notification No. 4/97-C.E., dated 1-3-97 as amended by Notification No. 19/97-C.E., dated 11-4-97. Through invoices No. 282, dated 9-3-98 and 277, dated 6-3-98, M/s. Crimplon has paid the duty. Hence except minor procedural lapse that the goods have come via a processor, I do not find any factor that has emerged which would be responsible for denying the credit. Further I find what that the dealer's premises is the head office of the appellants. In such case if only on endorsement was made on the mother invoices by the appellants for sending the entire consignment to their unit No. 2 at B.T. Road, credit could not be denie ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
