TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Tribunal grants Modvat credit despite delayed document, ruling in favor of appellants</h1> <h3>JK. SYNTHETICS LTD. Versus COLLECTOR OF CENTRAL EXCISE, JAIPUR</h3> JK. SYNTHETICS LTD. Versus COLLECTOR OF CENTRAL EXCISE, JAIPUR - 1996 (84) E.L.T. 357 (Tribunal) Issues:Late receipt of duty paying document and endorsement on the certificate issued by the supplier.Analysis:The appellants challenged the Collector (Appeals) order citing delayed receipt of the duty paying document and an endorsement on the certificate issued by the supplier. The appellants received certain inputs on 7-11-1992, but the duty paying document was issued on 20-11-1992. The Department contended that since the duty paying document was not available when the inputs were received, the appellants were not entitled to Modvat credit. Additionally, there was an endorsement on the duty paying document, raising concerns about its validity.The learned Advocate argued that the appellants only took credit upon receiving the certificate in lieu of the gate pass, as per established practice. He referenced previous judgments to support the appellants' case, emphasizing that the late receipt of the duty paying document should not disqualify them from claiming Modvat credit. The Tribunal's past decisions highlighted that the duty paying document need not accompany the inputs at the time of receipt, as long as the necessary documents are eventually provided.Further, the Advocate referred to a judgment stating that an endorsement on the duty paying document does not render it invalid. He contended that the endorsement on the certificate was unnecessary and did not impact its validity. The Tribunal analyzed the facts and determined that the endorsement was superfluous, and the certificate remained valid for claiming Modvat credit.The Tribunal examined both issues raised and concluded that the endorsement on the certificate did not invalidate it for Modvat credit purposes. Despite the delayed receipt of the certificate, the Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellants, allowing them to avail Modvat credit. The impugned order was set aside, and the appeal was allowed, granting the appellants the appropriate relief as per the law.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
