TMI Blog2005 (12) TMI 37X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 365-09/OS-NBS. 2. Since these appeals arise out of a common order, the same are being disposed of by this order. According to the Revenue, the order of the Tribunal gives rise to the following substantial question of law: "Whether Modvat credit on original documents, which were not prescribed documents, could be availed without following the procedure laid down in this regard?" 3. Briefly stated, the background facts, giving rise to the present appeals, are as follows: The respondent-assessee is engaged in the manufacture of Carbon Black, falling under Chapter 28 of the Schedule to the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985. It was availing the facility of Modvat credit under Rule 57A of the erstwhile Central Excise Rules, 1944 (for short, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... issioner. 6. Not being satisfied with the view taken by the Commissioner, the assessee took the matter in further appeals to the Tribunal. By the impugned order, the Tribunal has allowed the appeals. Hence, the present appeals. 7. We have heard Mr. M.S. Guglani, learned Central Government Counsel appearing on behalf of the revenue. Learned Counsel has submitted that the provisions relating to claim for Modvat credit being substantive in character, furnishing of duplicate copies of invoices, under sub-rule (2A) of Rule 57G of the Rules, inserted on 28-5-1994, is a mandatory condition, which an assessee is required to comply with. Learned counsel has argued that since, in the instant case, the assessee had not sought permission of the Ass ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ante clause, carves out an exception to sub-rule (3). It provides that a manufacturer may take credit on the inputs received in his factory on the basis of original invoice, if duplicate copy of the invoice has been lost in transit, subject to the satisfaction of the Assistant Commissioner of Central Excise that (i) the inputs have been received in the factory of the said manufacturer and (ii) the duty was paid on such inputs. The scope of satisfaction of the Assistant Commissioner is restricted to the two aforenoted aspects. From a conjoint reading of sub-rules (3) and (6), the intent and object of the Legislature is manifestly clear. It is to prevent the misuse of the modvat claims and any fraud being played by a manufacturer. Being a ben ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
