TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
1998 (2) TMI 280
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... respect of two orders-in-original. There are two show cause notices for the respective cases. The first show cause notice is dated 10/14-9-1993 and the other is dated 28-10-1993. In the first show cause notice dated 14-9-1993 it was alleged that the appellants are engaged in the manufacture of steel ingots and are availing Modvat credit facility on duty paid inputs towards payment of duty on their final products in terms of declaration filed under Rule 57G of Central Excise Rules, 1944. During the period of May, 1993, they received 711.955 M.T. of Defective Blooms/Billets and other scrap as per details in Annexure A & B and in support of the same had produced duty paying documents in respect of S. Nos. 4 to 22 of Annexure 'A' which include....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s of these billets/blooms. Therefore, it was concluded in the show cause notice that they had received only melting scrap which was not duty paid and availed Modvat credit on the basis of the challans issued by the consignment agents of TISCO which did not cover the melting scrap actually received by them. Hence it was alleged that the Modvat credit on the basis of challans issued by the consignment agent of TISCO whose material was not actually received by them. It was also stated that the credit was admissible on the basis of challans issued by the consignment agent and hence duty demand of Rs. 4,84,305/- was demanded. Further demand was raised on the Modvat credit availed on the basis of G.P. 1s issued by SAIL. Endorsement to be made by ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....is sufficient to uphold the charge that they had not received the material and what had been received is only metal scrap. 4.  Ld. Advocate arguing for the appellants took us to the records inter alia he mentioned that the aspects pertaining to taking Modvat credit on the endorsed challans issued by the consignment agent is covered by the judgment rendered in the case of Hero Cycles as reported in 1994 (71) E.L.T. 1017 and that of M/s. S.B.S. Organics Pvt. Ltd. v. Collector, Central Excise as reported in 1990 (45) E.L.T. 701. It is his further submission that the material covered by TISCO challans was only 84 M.T. and that alone had exceeded Rs. 9,000/- per m.t. while in respect of the other quantity the average weight from 4,000/- ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....the allegation that they had taken Modvat credit on non-duty paid inputs is totally justified and the records proved to that extent. It is his submission that the aspect pertaining to the affidavit and other arguments raised by ld. Advocate is a new submission which had not been raised before the lower authorities. He also pointed out from the Board's letter No. F. 2/67/17/38-CX. 8, dated 19-2-1988 mentioned in 1988 (34) E.L.T. T17 that the Board had clarified that Modvat credit is not available on such endorsement. 6.  Countering the arguments ld. Advocate submits that there has been amendment to the said lettes after 1988 and hence these judgments of the Tribunal (sic) apply to the facts of the case. 7.  On a careful consi....