JINDAL METAL INDUSTRIES Vs. COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IN this appeal which has been filed by the appellants, the issue relates to the availability of Modvat credit to the appellants on the duplicate copy of the invoice. The authorities below have denied the credit on the ground that the supplier of the goods who issued the invoice to the appellants, did not submit the duplicate copy for the transporter and the triplicate copy of the Bill of Entry in terms of Rule 57G to the concerned Range Officer.

(2.) I have heard both sides. There is nothing on the record to suggest if any show cause notice was ever served on the supplier of the goods, viz. MMTC for having availed Modvat credit wrongly, before passing on the same through valid documents to the appellants. Even otherwise non submission of the relevant documents in the range office by the supplier of the goods, could not be made ground for penalising the present appellants who admittedly received the goods on payment of duty through valid documents. The duty paid character of the goods and utilisation of the same by them in the factory has not been disputed by the Department. They had taken the credit on the valid proper duty paying documents. Therefore, the impugned order of the Commissioner (Appeals) disallowing Modvat credit to the appellants is not maintainable and the same is set aside. The appeal of the appellants stands allowed with consequential relief, if any, permissible under the law.