Modvat credit dispute remanded after mechanical pre-deposit insistence and failure to consider assessee submissions.

An order insisting on full pre-deposit was set aside because the assessee's submissions and the relevance of Board instructions were not properly considered. The original adjudication was found to have ignored the defence and failed to examine the legal position applicable to the claim for Modvat credit, while the appellate authority had acted mechanically instead of curing that lack of application of mind. The matter was remanded to the jurisdictional adjudicating authority for fresh adjudication, with a direction to hear the assessee and pass a reasoned speaking order after considering the instructions relied upon and the applicable law.

---

---

Issues: Whether the order insisting on full pre-deposit and dismissing the appeal without proper consideration of the assessee's submissions and the Board's instructions was sustainable, and whether the matter required remand for fresh adjudication.

Analysis: The original adjudication was found to have ignored the assessee's defence and did not examine the relevance of the Board's instructions to the facts. The appellate authority also declined relief by mechanically insisting on complete deposit instead of correcting the lack of application of mind. In these circumstances, the dispute had to be reconsidered by the jurisdictional adjudicating authority after examining the instructions relied upon and the legal position applicable to the claim for Modvat credit.

Conclusion: The appeal was allowed, the impugned order was set aside, and the matter was remanded for fresh decision after giving the assessee an opportunity of being heard and passing a reasoned speaking order.

---