Commissioner of Central Excise Vs. Ambalal Sarabhai Enterprises - Court Judgment

Excerpt:
1. in this case the appellate authority has granted modvat credit after looking into invoices on which serial number has been typed and the invoices were issued by the manufacturers themselves. the adjudicating authority had denied the modvat credit on the ground that it was not printed. in paragraph 5 of the order the appellate authority has stated that the serial number has been typed and there was no dispute that duty has not been paid on the inputs. it has been specifically held by the appellate authority that the invoice has been issued in terms of rule 52a of the central excise rules. the so called technical error is only a minor one.2. i have considered the grounds raised by the department. they have relied on the judgment of the tribunal in the case of m.a. prestressed works v. cce 1999 (108) elt 741 which held that invoice without printed serial number is not a valid document in terms of rule 57gg. the said judgment does not discuss about the typed number given in the invoice.the word printed means after the matter is got printed in the press or typed by the typewriter, the effect is the same namely it is not written. moreover the amount involved in this case is rs. 2,188/- which is a trivial matter for the department. there is no principle involved which would required the department to fight till the last. hence i dismiss the appeal exercising the power vested in me under second proviso to section 35b of the central excise act.

Judgment:
1. In this case the appellate authority has granted modvat credit after looking into invoices on which serial number has been typed and the invoices were issued by the manufacturers themselves. The adjudicating authority had denied the modvat credit on the ground that it was not printed. In paragraph 5 of the order the appellate authority has stated that the serial number has been typed and there was no dispute that duty has not been paid on the inputs. It has been specifically held by the appellate authority that the invoice has been issued in terms of Rule 52A of the Central Excise Rules. The so called technical error is only a minor one.

2. I have considered the grounds raised by the department. They have relied on the judgment of the Tribunal in the case of M.A. Prestressed Works v. CCE 1999 (108) ELT 741 which held that invoice without printed serial number is not a valid document in terms of Rule 57GG. The said judgment does not discuss about the typed number given in the invoice.

The word printed means after the matter is got printed in the press or typed by the typewriter, the effect is the same namely it is not written. Moreover the amount involved in this case is Rs. 2,188/- which is a trivial matter for the department. There is no principle involved which would required the department to fight till the last. Hence I dismiss the appeal exercising the power vested in me under second proviso to Section 35B of the Central Excise Act.