BHILAI AUXILIARY INDUS. Vs. CCE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In this appeal, which has been filed against the impugned Order -in -Appeal, the issue relates to the availability of the deemed modvat credit to the appellants in terms of the Notification No. 58/97 dated 30.8.1997.

(2.) The authorities below have denied the credit on the inputs to the appellants under this Notification as the Manufacturer of the inputs had failed to declare the invoice price of the inputs correctly in the documents (invoices) issued at the time of clearance of the goods by him from his factory.

(3.) The learned Counsel has contended that since no show cause notice had been issued to the manufacturer/supplier of the inputs for having failed to give the details, as required under the above said notification in the invoices issued by him to the appellants at the time of clearance of the goods, the deemed credit could not be denied to the appellants. The learned Counsel has sought support to his argument from the law laid down in the case of Delhi Steel Indus, v. CCE, Chandigarh 2002 (149) ELT 673. But I am unable to subscribe to this contention of the learned Counsel. It has not been disputed before me by the learned Counsel that the invoices issued by the manufacturer/supplier of the inputs did not disclose the invoice rice of the said inputs correctly and as such the benefit of the Notification No. 58/97 -CE, referred to above, for claiming the deemed modvat credit on those inputs could not be claimed by the appellants in view of the specific bar created by Clause 5 of the Notification.