TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2003 (5) TMI 406
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....y the credit that this appellant had taken during the period between August and December, 1992 and between July and December, 1993. The basis for the denial contained in the notice and in the subsequent corrigendum that was issued is threefold. It first proposed to deny Modvat credit in those cases where the gate passes did not bear upon them the part number of the input as figuring in the declaration filed by the assessee under Rule 57G. It secondly, proposed to deny credit on those invoices taken of the duty shown in the gate passes which bore a part number, but the number did not tally with the number shown against the input in Rule 57G declaration. The third proposed to deny the credit on the ground that the assessee had not enclosed th....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....of particular finished products. Credit has therefore been rightly denied. 3. Counsel for the appellant explains to us that a particular number is allotted to each input that is received by the appellant required not only for manufacture, but indeed to every item that is supplied for use in its factory. The object of allotting such a number, requiring large number of components, is to provide an easy system of identifying a particular item which goes into or used in the manufacture, of the machine, or is used elsewhere, such as in the office, both for the purposes of inventory control by its supplier and for identification by this appellant for such purposes as inventory. The Commissioner is, in our view, right when he says that model....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....number to be specified. The rule which we have excerpted above provides for it. There is some controversy as to whether the appellant was asked to furnish part number in the 57G declaration, the departmental representatives maintaining that it was and the appellant contending that it was not. This is not really crucial to the issue. All that can be done by applying Rule 57G(1), is to insist that the manufacturer include part numbers in the 57G declaration. 4. We are however not able to find any requirement in the rules asking the supplier of the goods to indicate on the gate passes part number used by intending recipient of the input. The provisions of Rule 52A, which specifies the particulars required to be contained in an invoice an....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ere is not the slightest indication in the notice issued to the appellant or in the order that such verification was conducted which showed that inputs covered by a gate pass bearing a part number which indicated in the 57G declaration were not in fact used or necessary for use in the manufacture of any of the appellant's final product. It has, of course, also to be borne in mind that the gate pass or invoice will contain in addition to the part number, the description of the part or item - steel sheet, bolt, etc. Presumably, the departmental officers would have conducted checks to see that the declared inputs are in fact utilised in the manufacture of finished products. It is also necessary to note at this stage that the requirement of fil....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... on this ground as also on the ground that copy of the declaration under Rule 57G was not given, for the period January to June, 1993. In his order confirming the demand, the Commissioner demands duty only with regard to missing or unconnected part numbers and does not say a word about this issue. The Commissioner's order in any case has been set aside by the Tribunal. On 28-12-1993, the appellant was told by the Assistant Commissioner that it should henceforth submit original duty paying documents along with RT 12 returns for verification and defacing and it has complied with this requirement thereafter. There is therefore no intention at all to evade duty and to take credit wrongly by not submitting the documents and the extended period o....