Modvat credit on imported capital goods remanded for fresh consideration after allowing production of the bill of entry.

Pre-deposit of the balance duty and entire penalty was dispensed with because the appellants had already deposited a substantial part of the confirmed duty and the dispute was confined to denial of Modvat credit on imported capital goods for want of the original bill of entry. As the duplicate bill of entry was stated to have been lost and a copy was being procured from Customs, the impugned order was set aside and the matter remanded to the original adjudicating authority. The authority was directed to allow production of the relevant bill of entry and decide the credit claim afresh.

---

---

Issues: Whether the appellants were required to make pre-deposit of the balance duty and penalty, and whether the dispute relating to denial of Modvat credit on imported capital goods deserved remand for production of the relevant bill of entry.

Analysis: The appellants had already deposited a substantial part of the confirmed duty. The dispute arose because credit was denied on the ground that the relevant bill of entry had not been produced and only xerox copies were relied upon. The appellants stated that the duplicate bill of entry had been lost and that efforts were being made to procure a copy from Customs.

Conclusion: The condition of pre-deposit of the balance duty and the entire penalty was dispensed with, and the impugned order was set aside with a remand to the original adjudicating authority to permit production of the relevant bill of entry and decide the matter afresh.

Final Conclusion: The matter was sent back for fresh adjudication after allowing the appellants an opportunity to produce the necessary import document, with interim relief granted on deposit requirements.

---