2004 (8) TMI 218

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....(J)]. - Heard both sides. 2. The appellant filed this appeal against order-in-appeal whereby the benefit of Modvat credit was denied to the appellant. The brief facts of the case are that the appellants are engaged in the manufacture of steel tubes. Prior to 1-3-94 the steel tubes were exempted from payment of duty, therefore, the appellants were paying duty on the intermediate product i.e. C.R....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....he adjudicating authority for claiming the Modvat credit on the amount in question under Rule 57H of Central Excise Rules. 3. In pursuance to the remand order, the adjudicating authority again confirmed the demand on the ground that the appellant had not produced the original duty paying documents i.e. GP-1s. The Commissioner (Appeals) also dismissed the appeal of the appellant on the same grou....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....respect of intermediate product and all the duty paying documents were produced by them. Therefore, the credit cannot be denied on the ground the appellant failed to substantiate their claim. 5. The contention of the Revenue in the remand order is that the Tribunal gave a specific direction to the appellant that they will produce the documents in support of their claim and as the appellant fail....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....pellant will substantiate their claim in respect of Modvat credit under Rule 57H of Central Excise Rules. In view of the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court relied upon by the Revenue, being a coordinate bench, we are bound by the direction contained in the remand proceedings. Now the issue before us is whether the appellant has substantiated their claim for taking Modvat credit in respect of inputs....