TMI Blog2017 (11) TMI 645X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Mr. Anil Choudhary, Member (Judicial) Shri Arun Pathak, Advocate, for Appellant Shri D.K. Deb, Assistant Commissioner (AR), for Respondent ORDER Per: Anil Choudhary The present appeal is filed by appellant-assessee against Order-in-Appeal No.GZB/EXCUS/000/APP/241/2014-15 dated 28/11/2014 passed by Commissioner of Central Excise Customs (Appeals), Noida. 2. The issue in this appeal is admissibility of Modvat credit on the basis of the attested photocopies of the invoices. 3. This is the second round of litigation. In the earlier round, this Tribunal took notice of the fact that the dispute relates to eligibility of Modvat/Cenvat credit on the inputs lying in godown of the appellant as on 01/03/2000. Tho ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... lant points out that in the course of verification, pursuant to remand, they also produced certificate dated 08/04/2014 issued by the manufacturer supplier M/s India Foils Ltd (which company had subsequently merged with the M/s Ess Dee Aluminum Ltd with effect from 30/09/2010), wherein it have been certified after verification of the records that the company M/s Ess Dee Aluminum Ltd (formerly India Foils Ltd) has supplied the materials according to the invoice numbers, giving description of the material to the appellant-International Tobacco Company Ltd, Ghaziabad, on payment of appropriate Excise duty thereon. Thereafter, the table in certificate is giving the details of the invoice numbers, dates, description of goods and the amount and b ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... not disputed and it is found that documents are genuine and not fraudulent, then the manufacturer would be entitled to Modvat credit on duty paid inputs. Reference was also made to the Ruling of Hon ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Commissioner of Central Excise Vs Gujarat Medicraft Pvt. Ltd, and also the Circular of CBEC dated 19/11/2001. 6. Having considered the rival contentions and on perusal of the appeal records, I find that Cenvat credit have been denied only on the basis of non-availability of the original documents. I also find that the Courts below have failed to follow the directions in the remand order of this Tribunal to verify the fact of duty paid nature of the inputs and their receipt in the factory of production ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
