2000 (12) TMI 577

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

...., SDR, for the Respondent. [Order]. - After dispensing with the condition of pre-deposit of duty amount of Rs. 1,85,744.76, I take up the appeal itself with the consent of both sides. 2. The above amount has been confirmed against the appellants by denying them the Modvat credit of duty availed by them during the period from November, 1994 to February, 1995, on the alleged discrepancy in ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....cate copies These were Dealer's Invoices issued by Indian Oil Corporation Limited in the year 1994. At that time there was no requirement as regards duplicate copy in respect of Dealer's Invoices for availing modvat credits. These were computer generated Invoices bearing running serial number and were duly signed and initialled by Indian Corpn. Ltd. As per Board's letter bearing F. No. 212/3/95- ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....sporter copy". It has also specifically endorsed the said Invoice as "duplicate for transporter" with its rubber stamp and signature (pages 60 & 61). 4. Shri Bagaria, learned Advocate also submits that most of the discrepancies alleged in the show cause notice were got rectified by them at the latest stage. But the Commissioner (Appeals) has refused to take note of the same on the ground tha....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....assessees and the assessees should be given a chance to get the same rectified. Inasmuch as the appellants claimed that all the discrepancies pointed out by the Revenue were got rectified by them, I set aside the impugned Order in regard to the portion adverse to the appellants and remand the matter to the original adjudicating authority to verify the said claim of the appellants. In doing so, he ....