2001 (11) TMI 854

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... Excise, Muzaffarnagar vide his order dated 17-8-97. The period relating to the availment of this Modvat credit is from December, 1995 to February, 1996. The party filed an appeal against the order of the Assistant Commissioner but the same is rejected by the Commissioner (Appeals), Ghaziabad vide his order dated 16-11-98. The present appeal is against the impugned order of Commissioner (Appeals). I have heard, Shri Bipin Garg, Advocate for the appellant and Shri V.K. Varma, JDR for the respondents. My findings in respect of each item on which the Modvat credit has been denied to the appellants, on taking into consideration the submissions of the learned Counsel for the appellants and those of the learned JDR are as follows : (1) &n....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....the rules are amended to the effect inter alia that even if the declaration filed under the relevant provisions of rule does not contain all the details required to be contained therein or the manufacturer fails to comply with other requirements of this rule, the credit shall not be denied on such grounds. Accordingly the Tribunal in the cited decision remanded the matter to the original authority for re-consideration for admissibility of the Modvat credit. In the matter under consideration also the order so far as it relates to the denial of the Modvat credit for not making the declaration for the capital goods is set aside and the matter is remanded to the original authority to re-consider the admissibility of the Modvat credit on the sam....