1994 (6) TMI 61

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....to interfere with the impugned order of the Assistant Collector." The Assistant Collector in his finding had observed :- "The party has disputed the demand on facts for Rs. 13,385.27 on the ground that the credit equivalent to this amount was in respect of C.R. Sheets and not in respect of Copper/Brass Sheets/Strips. As per records, the bills produced by the party did not show the complete description/variety of the goods. It was for the party to intimate the correct description/variety of the goods so that the admissibility of credit could be ascertained. So much so, even after the issue of show cause notice, the party did not produce before me any documentary evidence in support of their claim. Therefore, I observe that the credit claim....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....G 23A Part I and the supporting vouchers showing receipt of C.R. Sheets and used as inputs in the goods manufactured by them. The Collector (Appeals) in the order passed has held :- "I have observed that the appellant have not produced any document evidencing the payment of duty as required and specified in proviso to Rule 57G(2) of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 in respect of the inputs for which the appellant took credit in their RG 23A Part II Register. This is one of the conditions for claiming credit." The ld. Counsel for the appellant submitted that this finding of the Collector (Appeals) is not right in as much as deemed credit is admissible. Had the documents of payment of duty on the goods been available, there was no question of....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....t be recognisable as duty paid but since the goods were not recognisable as duty paid, therefore, the question of allowing deemed credit on the goods claimed by the appellant did not arise. 5. Heard the submissions of both sides and considered them. I find that Modvat credit amounting to Rs. 36,064.07 was denied to the appellant. Out of this Rs. 13,385.27 pertained to Modvat credit taken as deemed credit basis on use of C.R. Sheets as inputs. The appellant whereas did not agitate about denial of Modvat credit amounting to Rs. 22,878.80 taken as deemed credit on Brass Sheets, Copper and Strips. They agitated the denial of Modvat credit of Rs. 13,385.07 on the ground that credit was in respect of C.R. Sheets on which deemed credit @ Rs. 365 ....