2000 (1) TMI 379

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... Respondents. [Order]. -  Appellants filed this appeal against the order-in-appeal dated 8-2-1998 passed by the Commissioner (Appeals) Central Excise. In this case the benefit of Modvat credit was denied to the appellant on the ground that in the invoice the name of the appellant was mentioned as consignee on the reverse of the invoice. Learned Counsel submits the appellants are manufac....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....He, therefore, prays that the appeal be allowed. 2. Learned JDR appearing on behalf of the Revenue submits that the name of the appellant was not mentioned in the invoice as consignee. Therefore, the appellants are not entitled for the benefit of Modvat credit. 3. Heard both sides. 4. In this case the only objection the Revenue is that the name of the applicant as consignee....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....of the appellants was shown in the documents, it would establish the link between the goods and the ultimate consignee, who happened to be the appellants. Such a description in the documents would, itself, be in the nature of endorsement in their favour, made by the concerned person for the buyer in the cases, referred to above, by the Learned Counsel for the appellants and it has been settled tha....