TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2000 (7) TMI 515
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Shri Satnam Singh, SDR, for the Respondents. [Order per : P.S. Bajaj, Member (J)]. - This appeal has been filed by the appellants against the order dated 2-3-1994 passed by the Collector (Appeals) vide which he had reversed the order-in-original dated 8-12-1990 of the Assistant Collector who allowed the refund of the duty amount of Rs. 32,645.23 to the appellants. 2. The facts giving....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s that the MS scrap purchased by them as re-rolling material, was duty paid. But this order of the Assistant Collector was reversed by the Collector (Appeals) through the impugned order when challenged before him on the ground that the appellants were not entitled to the benefit of Notification No. 202/88 as their (MS scrap) was not proved to be duty paid and that no deemed Modvat credit could als....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ention of the counsel the learned SDR has argued that since the duty paid nature of the MS scrap purchased by the appellants from M/s. Simplex Castings did not stand proved, they had been rightly denied the benefit of Notification No. 202/88 and of deemed credit under the Modvat credit scheme by the Collector (Appeals) and that the impugned order is perfectly valid. 7. We have heard both t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....gally drawn. It was for the appellants in order to claim the benefit of the notification in question or of deemed credit to prove that the MS scrap purchased by them from the supplier M/s. Simplex Castings was duty paid. Therefore, the Collector (Appeals) had rightly reversed the order-in-original of the Assistant Collector who erroneously allowed them the benefit of the notification by raising th....