RAJESH TRADERS Vs. COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal has been filed by the appellants against the impugned order -in -appeal dated 11 -2 -2002 vide which the Commissioner (Appeals) has affirmed the order -in -original dated 16 -2 -2000 of the Deputy Commissioner.

(2.) The appellants are engaged in the manufacture of iron and steel products. They took Modvat credit of Rs. 1,67,209/ - on 91.265 MT defective plates received by them during the month of April, 1996, by declaring the same as inputs used in the manufacture of rounds, bar, angles, channel, flats or iron and steel and utilized that credit towards the payment of duty on final products cleared by them from the factory. They were served with a show cause notice for having taken the Modvat credit illegally and wrongly. In reply, the appellants avered that the credit had been rightly taken by them as defective plates received by them were used in the manufacture of the final products. The Deputy Commissioner did not accept their version and confirmed the demand and also imposed penalty of Rs. 50,000/ -. The Commissioner (Appeals) has affirmed that order.

(3.) None has come present on behalf of the appellants. A request for adjournment has been received from the consultant on the ground that he has to come in some another appeal of different assessees on 15 -11 -2002 and as such this case be also adjourned accordingly. But the file shoves that similar request was made earlier by the appellants vide letter dated 2 -9 -2002. In that letter, request on this very ground was made and adjournment was sought for 7 -10 -2002 and the same was granted. The record also shows that stay application of the appellants was decided on 12 -8 -2002 and the case was posted for hearing on 17 -9 -2002. But on that, on the request of the authorized representative, the case was adjourned for 30 -10 -2002. But today i.e. 30 -10 -2002, again a request has been sent by the consultant on the ground, detailed above. It appears that the appellants and their consultant an? deliberately prolonging the matter. I do not find any sufficient ground to adjourn the matter any more. I proceed to decide the case on merits.