1994 (3) TMI 228

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... Shri M.M. Mathur, JCDR and Shri V.C. Bhartiya, JDR, for the Respondent. [Order per : S.K. Bhatnagar, Vice President]. - These are stay applications filed by two different appellants against two different orders but both the sides submit that the issue involved is the same. 2. In both the cases the goods received as inputs by the appellants were the ones which had been manufactured by IP....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....for denial of modvat benefit. 6. It was their submission that there is no doubt or dispute that the inputs as well as the outputs were declared items and the inputs received on gate pass had been utilised for the manufacture of the declared outputs. 7. It was also their contention that in case the department felt that instead of endorsement on the gate pass, subsidiary gate pass should....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ally in such cases subsidiary gate passes should have been issued and obtained which has not been done. Similarly, more than two endorsements are not permissible and the endorsed gate passes are acceptable only in case of whole consignment and not part consignment as per the Government Circular. 11. They have no objection if the appeals are also considered today itself. 12. We have considered ab....