Judgment:
1. Revenue filed this appeal against the order-in-appeal passed by the Commissioner (Appeals).
3. Brief facts of the case are that the appellants are engaged in the manufacture of Non-alloy steel ingots and they were working under the Modvat Scheme. During the period July, 96 to November, 96, the appellant took Modvat Credit as Rs. 7,58,123/- on the strength of invoices issued by registered dealers namely M/s. Sanchit Steels, M/s.
Arun Steel & Agro Industries and M/s. Bal Mukand Mohinder Kumar. A Show Cause Notice was issued to the appellants for denial of Modvat Credit on the ground that the registered dealer received the raw material that is the scrap from M/s. Shree Ambica Steel Industries and M/s. Lakshmi Steels Industries and it was found that no scrap was generated at the premises of those Units. Therefore, no scrap was received by registered dealers. Hence, the respondents are not entitled for the benefit of the Modvat credit.
4. The contention of the respondents is that there is no allegation against the respondents that they have not received the scrap along with duty paying documents. If any irregularity is done by the dealer then he is liable for penal action and the Revenue had not issued any Show Cause Notice to the dealer. Therefore, the Modvat Credit cannot be denied to the respondents. The contention of the respondents is also that after verifying the record maintained by the dealer, the Commissioner allowed the appeal.
5. In this case the allegation against the respondents is that they availed the benefit of Modvat Credit on the strength of duty paying documents issued by the registered dealers and dealers received goods from non-existence units. The Revenue is not taking any objection in respect of the duty paying documents under which the goods were received by the respondents. The objection of the Revenue is that dealer had shown the receipt of the inputs from non-existence Units.
The Commissioner after going through the evidence on record specifically held that invoices on the strength which the respondents had taken Modvat Credit do contain relevant entry numbers in RG-23D record maintained by the registered dealers and also contain the required particulars of manufacturer showing that appropriate duty has been paid and all the consignments in question are crossed the Octroi Post Barriers and appropriate octroi tax has been paid on the consignments and these facts are not disputed by the Revenue and the Respondents made payment through cheques. The Respondents also produced the record maintained by the manufacturer of the inputs which shows that PBC checks were conducted by the Central Excise staff and their monthly RT-12 Return was duly assessed. This factual aspect is not rebutted by the Revenue in the present appeal. In view of this finding of the fact which is supported by the documentary evidence, I find no infirmity in the impugned order. The appeal is rejected.