Judgment:
1. The application for restoration of the appeal dismissed by Order No.CI/4065/WZB/2002, dated 2-12-2002 is allowed in view of the explanation of the appellants that notice fixing the hearing of the appeal on 21-11-2002 was received on 20-11-2002 and therefore they could not contact and brief their advocate for appearance on the date fixed.
3. Out of the 14 invoices on which credit has taken and disallowed, 12 are endorsed invoices. In the light of the Larger Bench decision in the case of Balmer Lawrie Co. Ltd. v. CCE, Kanpur - 2000 (116) E.L.T. 364 it is held that endorsed invoices are not a valid duty paying documents for the purpose of taking Modvat credit. Therefore credit availed on 12 endorsed invoices is held to be inadmissible. However, as regard the invoices No. 9 dated 7-4-1994 and invoice No. 50, dated 25-4-1994 of M/s. Pioneer Dye Chem Corporation covering a total amount of Rs. 50,616/- the ground for denial is that Pioneer Dye Chem Corporation is not a wholesale dealer. The requirement is that the person issuing the invoice should be either a wholesale distributor or dealer and there is no requirement that he should be a wholesale dealer. Therefore credit of Rs. 50,616/- availed on these two invoices is held to be admissible to the appellants.
4. Penalty of Rs. 30,000/- has been imposed upon the appellants for wrong availment of credit which I now reduce to Rs. 20,000/- having regard to the fact that credit has been held to be admissible on two disputed invoices.