ORDER
1. The Respondent availed of modvat credit on the strength of endorsed bill of entry. Show cause notice was issued seeking denial of the credit taken on the ground that the purchases were not made on the basis of high seas sale. The Dy. Commissioner denied the modvat credit and confirmed the recovery of Rs. 70,697/-. The Commissioner (Appeals) relying upon the Tribunal judgment in the case of CCE Vs. Goodlass Nerolac Paints Ltd. (26) ELT 57 allowed the appeal. Hence the appeal from the Revenue.
2. In the grounds of appeal it is claimed that the Government have stipulated an endorsed bill of entry as modvatable document only in the case of high seas sale. On this ground prayer is made for setting aside the impugned order.
3. In a number of judgments the Tribunal has held that endorsed bill of entry is a modvatable document. Some of these judgments are listed below:
1995 (7) RLT 59
1996 (83) ELT 681
1996 (84) ELT 214
1998 (99) ELT 144
1998 (99) ELT 279
1999 (112) ELT 299
4. The Tribunal in holding so has not distinguished the buyers who have purchased on high seas sale basis and the buyers who have purchased the imported goods after the importation on payment of customs duty. In the judgment reproduced in 1998 (29) RLT 569 the Tribunal had taken cognisance of the circular of the Board permitting limited credit where sale is on high seas sale basis. In an identical issue Revenue had requested for a reference to the jurisdictional High Court which the Tribunal had turned down noting that the Tribunal had extended the meaning of the relaxation given by the Board was not correct. [ CCE Mumbai Vs. National Leather Cloth Manufacturing Company 1999 (113) ELT 229].
5. Once the endorsed bill of entry is held to be a modvatable document the kind of transaction which resulted in the transfer of property is not material. Therefore it is not appropriate to limit the eligibility of the document only where sale is on high seas sale basis.
6. The appeal does not succeed and is dismissed.