Cce, Chandigarh-ii Vs. M/S. Continental Transformers - Court Judgment

Excerpt:
1. in this appeal filed by the revenue, the matter relates to the availment of modvat credit in respect of the cold rolled (cr) coil ends used in the manufacture of distribution transformers. cr coil ends were classifiable under sub-heading no. 7211.51 of the tariff while in their declaration, the respondents, m/s. continental transformers, jammu had indicated the sub-heading as 7211.00 of the tariff. the commissioner of central excise (appeals) had allowed the modvat credit on the ground that the variation in the declared sub-heading was only minor. the goods have been actually received and used and there was no other discrepancy noted.2. when the matter was called, none appeared for the respondents. a notice for today's hearing was issued as early s on 16.1.2001. there is no response. there is no request for adjournment.3. i have heard shri s.c. pushkarna, jdr and have gone through the facts on record.4. i find that the commissioner of cental excise (appeals) has taken a reasonable view in the matter depending on the facts and circumstances of the case. he has also relied upon the board's circular no.219/53/96-cx dated 4.6.96. i do not find any infirmity in the view taken by the commissioner (appeals). as a result, the appeal filed by the revenue is rejected. ordered accordingly.

Judgment:
1. In this appeal filed by the Revenue, the matter relates to the availment of modvat credit in respect of the Cold Rolled (CR) Coil Ends used in the manufacture of distribution transformers. CR Coil Ends were classifiable under sub-heading No. 7211.51 of the Tariff while in their declaration, the respondents, M/s. Continental Transformers, Jammu had indicated the sub-heading as 7211.00 of the Tariff. The Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals) had allowed the modvat credit on the ground that the variation in the declared sub-heading was only minor. The goods have been actually received and used and there was no other discrepancy noted.

2. When the matter was called, none appeared for the respondents. A notice for today's hearing was issued as early s on 16.1.2001. There is no response. There is no request for adjournment.

3. I have heard Shri S.C. Pushkarna, JDR and have gone through the facts on record.

4. I find that the Commissioner of Cental Excise (Appeals) has taken a reasonable view in the matter depending on the facts and circumstances of the case. He has also relied upon the Board's Circular No.219/53/96-CX dated 4.6.96. I do not find any infirmity in the view taken by the Commissioner (Appeals). As a result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is rejected. Ordered accordingly.