ORDER
Gowri Shankar, Member (Technical)
1. The appeal is taken up for disposal after waiving deposit, with the consent of both sides.
2. The order of the Commissioner impugned in this appeal demands duty on the ground that the goods that the appellant imported were not entitled to the benefit of notification 203/92. The show cause notice advances, as a reason for the denial, that the appellant had availed modvat credit in the manufacture of the exported goods, and thus contravened one of the condition sin the notification.
3. The Commissioner records that, despite three opportunities being given to it, the appellant did not produce the certificate of the jurisdictional Central Excise authorities that it had reversed the modvat credit that it had taken. This is questioned by the counsel for the appellant. He cites a letter dated 17.8.2000 of the appellant to the Commissioner which refers to a hearing held on the previous day, and purports to enclose a certificate from the jurisdictional Central Excise authorities. This letter has been acknowledged by the Commissioner’s office. It is therefore reasonable to conclude that the appellant had produced the certificate and the Commissioner has not taken note of it. We think that the Commissioner should consider the contents of the certificate.
4. Accordingly, the appeal is allowed and the impugned order set aside. The Commissioner shall, after granting the appellant one more opportunity of being heard, and considering the documents that it may submit, pass orders on the matter, in accordance with law.
5. The miscellaneous application is dismissed as withdrawn.