2012 (12) TMI 381

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....d. Advocate for the respondents. 3. The dispute in the present appeal relates to availment of Modvat credit by the respondents. For better appreciation, I reproduce the relevant para of the Commissioner's order :- "The perusal of invoices issued by M/s. Mardia Chemicals Ltd. (Sl. Nos. 1 to 5 of the table) reveals that the same are in the name of M/s. United Alkalies, Ghaziabad, although these invoices also bear the name & address of the appellants (appellant's factory at Ghaziabad) as consignee. In this regard, the submissions of the appellant is that in fact they placed order for supply of the goods through M/s. United Alkalies, Ghaziabad and therefore, the above invoices bear the name & address of the said M/s. United Alkalies.....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ubmission of the original/duplicate copies of the above invoices, it may be mentioned that the Hon'ble CESTAT in the remand order dated 25-10-2007 ibid has observed/held "I find that the appellant produced invoices issued by M/s. Mardia Chemicals vide letter dated 21-6-2002 and which was duly received by the revenue authorities. In these circumstances, it cannot be said that the appellant had not produced invoices for verification, therefore matter requires re-consideration". In the light of these observations of the Hon'ble CESTAT, the findings of the adjudicating authority in the subject matter appear to be incorrect. It therefore follows that credit in respect of the said invoices could not be denied on such ground of the alleged non-sub....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ld not produce original/duplicate copy of the said invoices. These invoices (original invoices) reportedly seized by the departmental authorities on 24-12-2001 as per relevant panchnama and statement of the appellants authorised signatory. It is an admitted fact that the appellants have produced the attested photocopies of the invoices in question to the jurisdictional lower authorities/adjudicating authority. In this context, the Hon'ble CESTAT in the remand order dated 25-10-2007 has also observed/held that "The appellants also produced copy of invoices issued by BPCL, which were obtained subsequently showing the payment of duty in respect of inputs received by them. In these circumstances, as the invoices were seized by the Revenue autho....