CCE, NEW DELHI Vs. HERO METAL CAST ENGG.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IN the impugned order Ld. Commissioner (Appeals) held that the dispute regarding the method of marking of copies of invoices remains decided in favour of the appellants in many cases. The objection regarding the non -declaration of certain inputs also is not justified as scrap is one of the inputs declared by the appellants. In the circumstances, denial of Modvat credit and imposition of penalty are not justified. The appeal is accordingly allowed with consequential relief to the appellant and adjudication order is set aside. Being aggrieved by this order, Revenue has filed the above appeal.

(2.) THE facts of the case briefly stated are that the appellants are engaged in the manufacture of different excisable goods falling under chapter heading 7325.10. They are also availing the facility of Modvat credit on inputs. Scrutiny of R.T.12 returns of the assessee revealed that Modvat was availed by the assessee on invoices which were not marked in the manner provided under Rule 52A; that on the invoices that S.No. and the description duplicate for transport was not printed. It was either stamped or handwritten or typed out Modvat credit was also availed on copy instead of the original; that credit was availed on the final products when rejected consignments were received back. The Asstt. Commissioner while confirming the demand ordered "In view of the facts, I hereby disallow the inadmissible Modvat credit of Rs. 2253/ - under Rule 57 -I of Central Excise Rules, 44 read with Section 11A of the Central Excise Act, 44 and order its recovery accordingly. I also impose a penalty of Rs. 2,000/ - upon the party under rule 173C of Central Excise Rules, 44 for contravention of Rule 52A and 173 -H of Central Excise Rules, 44".

(3.) REVENUE who is the appellant in this case was represented by Shri S.C. Pushkarna, Ld. DR who submitted that the Ld. Commissioner (Appeals) did not take into account that the rules violated by the appellant were of a mendatory nature; that the Central Excise assessee working under Chapter VII -A of Central Excise Rules was to seek prior permission for receipt of the rejected goods and file D -3 intimation; that in the instant case this requirement was not complied with and therefore, there was no question of availing Modvat credit in respect of rejected goods.