JAIN INDUSTRIAL CORPN. Vs. CCE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE appellants filed this appeal' against the order -in -appeal passed by the Commissioner (Appeals), whereby the benefit of MODVAT Credit of Rs. 25,407.00 had been denied and a penalty of equal amount had been imposed under Rule 57I(4) of the Central Excise Rules and a penalty of Rs. five thousand was imposed under Rule 173Q of the Central Excise Rules. Heard both sides.

(2.) THE contention of the appellants is that the credit was taken in the year 1994 and at the time of taking credit, R.T. 12 returns, along with relevant invoice, were filed. The present proceedings were initiated by issuing a show cause notice dated 1.12.1999 and it was alleged in the show cause notice that the appellants, while making a wilful misstatement/suppression of facts, availed the benefit of credit. The contention of the appellants is that at the time of taking credit, the invoice issued by the supplier of the goods showing the payment of central excise duty, was filed by the appellants. Therefore, no suppression can be alleged against them. The contention of the appellants is that in the show cause notice the allegation is that the description of the goods, which were imported, is different from the description of the goods given in the invoice. His submission is that the adjudicating authority, while passing the adjudication order, specifically held that the description of the goods in the bill of entry is tin plate waste sheets whereas in the invoice the description is shown as tinplate in skid form. The only difference the adjudicating authority found is that tin plates were imported by supplier in coil form whereas this was supplied in skid form. His contention is that the importer of tin coils had supplied the parts of the imported tin coils after slitting and in the invoice, the bill of entry number and details of customs duty as well as CVD are mentioned.