2002 (1) TMI 1031

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... Hitesh Shah, JDR, for the Respondent. [Order]. - The Assistant Commissioner of Central Excise, Jaipur, vide his two Orders-in-Original Nos. 124/96 and 193/96 both dated 14-2-96 denied the Modvat credit of Rs. 1,11,115/- and Rs. 50,842/- availed by the party on the strength of the invoices issued by the Jaipur depot of M/s. SAIL on the ground that the appellants had availed the excess Modvat....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....aken by them in their RG-23A Part II account and they are not responsible for the act done by M/s. SAIL. 2. The party filed the appeals against the aforesaid two orders of the Assistant Commissioner but the Commissioner (Appeals), Jaipur, vide his order dated 17-10-2000 rejected the appeals upholding the orders passed by the original authority. 3. These appeals are against the impu....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ate any short payment of duty. The ld. Counsel is relying on the following decisions in support of his contentions :- (1)     Shree Krishna Rolling Mills Ltd. v. CCE, Jaipur [2001 (129) E.L.T. 722 (T)] (2)     Modern Malleables Limited v. CCE, Calcutta [2000 (122) E.L.T. 270 (T)]. 4. I have considered these submissions made before me. As per th....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ew is held in the aforesaid cited two case laws. It is observed in these decisions that, "M/s. SAIL depot as a dealer have committed any irregularity in passing off the Modvat credit to the manufacturers then they should have made party to the proceedings." This being the position on facts and in law, the impugned order cannot be sustained and the same is accordingly set aside. The matter is reman....