9911796707
TMI Blog2004 (3) TMI 279X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... as been received. Therefore, I proceed to decide the appeal on merits after hearing the learned SDR. 2. In this appeal filed by the Revenue against the impugned order-in-appeal, the issue relates to the denial of the deemed Modvat credit to the respondents in terms of Notification No. 58/97-C.E., dated 30th August, 1997. The Asstt. Commissioner disallowed the Modvat credit to the respondents of t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... eived by the respondents directly for the manufacturer and this aspect has not been even contested by the Department. However, the second condition of the notification, in my view, does not stand satisfied. There is no evidence on the record to prima facie prove that the inputs manufacturer had discharged the duty while working under the Compounded Levy Scheme, under Section 3A of the Act. No doub ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... to be discharged" and "duty discharged". The learned Commissioner (Appeals) has failed to address himself, to this aspect. It appears from the impugned order that, he had misread the declaration. In internal page 2 of the order, at the bottom, it had observed by him that invoices did bear the input manufacturers' declaration that they had paid the duty on the inputs, but on the next page he had re ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
