2010 (2) TMI 608

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....Standing Counsel, for the Appellant. Shri M.P. Devnath, Advocate, for the Respondent. [Order per : Ashutosh Mohunta, J.]. - The Revenue has filed the present appeal impugning the order dated 16-11-2004 (Annexure P-3), passed by the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (for short 'the Tribunal') vide which the respondent has been held entitled to claim Modvat credit on the capit....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....s, however, objected to by the Revenue as according to them the Bill of Entry/Invoices were not in the name of the respondent, but were in the name of M/s. Frito Lay India. Show cause notices were issued as to why they should not be imposed penalty under Rule 173Q of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 for having availed wrong Modvat credit. 4. The order was passed by the adjudicating authority vide....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ular of the Board dated 1-3-1999. Counsel for the respondent has also placed reliance on Union of India v. Marmagoa Steel Ltd., reported as 2008 (229) E.L.T. 481 (S.C.). 6. We have gone through the order passed by the Tribunal as well as the case law cited by the counsel for the parties. In the present case, although the capital goods were imported by M/s. Frito Lay India, but the endorsement i....