D. Parikh Engg. Works Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise - Court Judgment

Excerpt:
1. this is an appeal against the order in appeal captioned above rejecting the appellant's appeal. there is no dispute that the appellants have taken the modvat credit on the basis of the subsidiary gate pass issued by the proper officer. we find that these gate passes have been issued in the name of the appellant. the basic document is found to be the challans issued by the stockyard of sail bombay.2. there is no dispute from the ld. dr that the board have recognised the challans of stockyards of sail as equivalent to gate pass. in the circumstances, when the proper officer has issued subsidiary gate pass on the basis of challans of stockyard, which are also recognised equivalent to gate pass and the subsidiary gate pass is also a prescribed document as per the notification issued by.....

Judgment:
1. This is an appeal against the order in appeal captioned above rejecting the appellant's appeal. There is no dispute that the appellants have taken the Modvat credit on the basis of the subsidiary gate pass issued by the Proper Officer. We find that these gate passes have been issued in the name of the appellant. The basic document is found to be the challans issued by the stockyard of SAIL Bombay.

2. There is no dispute from the ld. DR that the Board have recognised the challans of stockyards of SAIL as equivalent to gate pass. In the circumstances, when the Proper Officer has issued subsidiary gate pass on the basis of challans of stockyard, which are also recognised equivalent to gate pass and the subsidiary gate pass is also a prescribed document as per the Notification issued by the Board, we do not find any merit in the objection taken by the lower authorities. We therefore allow the appeal with the direction to restore the credit.