2015 (2) TMI 85

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... Jain, Advocate, for the Appellant. Shri Promod Kumar, Jt. CDR, for the Respondent. ORDER After hearing both sides, we find that the appellant is engaged in the activity of building bodies on the duty paid chassis supplied to him by M/s. TELCO, Jamshedpur on job work basis. They were also availing Cenvat credit of duty paid on the said chassis. 2. Revenue's grievance is that TISCO....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... It was alleged in the show cause notices that the invoices were issued in favour of TELCO, Bombay by TELCO, Jamshedpur and not in favour of the Noticee. On verification of the invoices, it has been found that Telco, Bombay has also issued invoices in favour of the noticee giving the reference of invoices, issued by TELCO, Jamshedpur and all the particulars as required under Notification No. 15/9....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....them will not be taken as proper invoices for the purpose of Cenvat credit. 5. After hearing both sides, we find that dispute can be resolved without going into the amendments carried out in the provisions of Rule 57G or 57H. There is no dispute about the fact that chassis manufactured and cleared from Jamshedpur were actually received by the appellant for the purpose of fabrication of the....