JUDGMENT
G.A. Brahma Deva, Member (J)
1. The issue relates to Modvat credit. The party has availed Modvat credit in respect of the invoices marked with rubber stamp.
2. Heard both sides.
3. It was submitted by Shri Narasimha Murthy appearing for the appellants that procedural lapse if any should nt come in the way of denial of substantial justice. He said that the Tribunal has been constantly taking the view that pre-printing is not mandatory and bearing with rubber stamp is also admissible provided the Modvat procedure is complied with.
4. I find that the Commissioner has passed an order without hearing the party.
5. Shri Thomas George, JDR appearing for the Revenue submitted that personal hearing was granted but none appeared nor party has made any written submissions. Hence the Commissioner has passed an ex-party order.
6. In the facts and circumstances I am of the view that the matter requires to be examined by the Commissioner (Appeals). It is settled position now that procedural lapse if any should not come in the way of denial of substantial justice. The party way make use of this opportunity to substantiate their claim. With these observations the matter is remanded to concerned adjudicating authority to examine the issue afresh and to pass an appropriate order on providing an opportunity to the party. Thus,, this appeal is allowed by way of remand.
7. (Pronounced and dictated in the open court)