L.M.L. LIMITED Vs. CCE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THESE appeals are filed against Order -in -Appeal dated 30.5.2004 which disposed of 4 Orders -in -Original that confirmed the demand of duty and imposed penalty on the appellant.

(2.) THE relevant facts that arise for consideration are that the appellant availed Modvat Credit on the invoices issued by the dealers/traders during the period July, 1994 to December, 1994. Show cause notices were issued to the appellants denying the Modvat Credit on the ground that these dealers/traders were not registered dealers with the Central Excise department. The appellants contested the show cause notices on the ground that these dealers/traders got themselves registered before 31st December, 2004 as directed by the Board vide its Circular No. 76/76/94 dated 8.11.94. The Adjudicating authority confirmed the demand on the appellants and imposed penalty. The Commissioner (Appeals), in respect of the credit availed by the appellants on the invoices issued by Indian Oil Corporation, allowed the appeal but in respect of other dealers/traders denied the Modvat Credit and upheld imposition of penalty but reduced the same.

(3.) LEARNED Advocate appearing for the appellant submits that the show cause notices were issued for denial of Modvat Credit only on the ground that the dealers/traders were not registered and the order -in -original confirmed the demand of duty on the ground that addresses of the traders were different and duty paying documents did not show the required details, etc. It is his submission that these order -in -original as well as order -in -appeal is traversing beyond the allegation made in the show cause notice. It is his alternative submission that the provisions of Notification 7/99 which amended Rule 57G by inserting Sub -rule (11), empowers the Asst. Commissioner to allow the credit on the inputs and capital goods ignoring minor procedural lapses.