1997 (5) TMI 297

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....n various grounds mentioned therein. 3. The grounds on which the Credit was denied by the original authority are as follows :- (a)     The respondents here had removed the inputs for processing on a job work basis without the requisite permission under the provisions of Rule 57F(2) of the Central Excise Rules, 1944; (b)     Modvat credit was availed by the respondents herein on the basis of xerox copies of G.P.1; (c)      Modvat credit was availed on processing loss and manufacturing loss; (d)     Inputs received were not recorded in RG-23A Part-I, whereas the Modvat credit, was taken in RG-23A Part-II. 4. The Commissioner (Appeals) while di....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....rew attention of the Bench to the Grounds of Appeal. 9. On going through the Grounds of Appeal, I find that the Department is aggrieved with that part of the impugned Order which allows the benefit of Modvat credit even where the permission under Rule 57F(2) had not been obtained by the respondents. 10. Shri Roy arguing on behalf of the appellant Commissioner, submits that obtaining of the permission in terms of Rule 57F(2) is a requirement of law and wherever it has been obtained, the Modvat credit should not be allowed on the same. He also submits that a reading of the Assistant Commissioner's Order would show that the respondents had admitted their lapse and pleaded that non-compliance with the prescribed procedure under Rule....