2012 (4) TMI 61

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....t demanded has been imposed on the first appellant M/s. Century Dyeing & Printing Mills. Further, penalty of Rs. 85,475/- has been imposed on Shri Govind G. Malpani, second appellant. 2. Learned consultant on behalf of the appellants submitted that appellant's grievance is that Cenvat credit has been denied without considering the provisions of Rule 9(2) of Cenvat Credit Rules, which provides that Cenvat credit can be allowed even when certain details which are required to be contained in invoices are not available. Learned AR submits that the invoices submitted by the appellants were all endorsed invoices but while endorsing first appellant's name was not mentioned in the invoices. In one case, where endorsement was found to be proper, ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....xception to the provisions of Rule 11 of Central Excise Rules, has not been taken note of by both the lower authorities. While Commissioner (Appeals) in the impugned order has not at all discussed this point, the original adjudicating authority, the Joint Commissioner did not consider this issue in his order. For better appreciation the relevant portion of the order is reproduced:- "20. In this case credit has been taken on the basis of invoices issued by M/s. Ranjana Enterprises, 215, Hariom Market, Ring Road, Surat and M/s. K.P. Synthetics, 6,7, Ramnagar Society, Rander Road, Surat and M/s. Shreeji Enterprise Plot No. 13/C, Bhatena Industrial Society, Anjana Chimni Tekra, Surat. As per Rule 11(2) of the Central Excise Rules, 2002, "The....