ORDER
Mrs. Archana Wadhwa
1. The short dispute in the present appeal is as regards the denial of MODVAT Credit of Rs.34,572.00 availed by the appellants on the basis of two invoices dated 7.7.94 and 24.6.94. The said MODVAT Credit had been disallowed on the ground that the invoices were endorsed twice and as such, were not proper modvatable invoices.
2. The contention of the appellants duly represented by Shri S.K.Roychowdhury, learned Advocate for the appellants is hat it was not a case of double endorsement of invoices, but issuance of the invoices by the manufacturers/dealers, M/s. Kailash Company. However, he fairly agrees that the said dealer was not a registered dealer at the time of issuance of invoices, but got himself registered subsequently on 3.8.94. In this connection, he draws my attention to the Registration Certificate issued by the Central Excise Authorities.
3. The contention of Shri A.K.Chattopadhyay, learned J.D.R. is that the said Certificate was not produced before the authorities below and as such, there was no occasion for the Assistant Commissioner to look into the said Certificate and verify the genuineness of the same. As such, he prays for remand of the matter.
4. Shri S.K.Roychowdhury, learned Advocate does not object to the above prayer.
5. In view of the foregoing, I set aside the impugned Order and remand the matter to the Assistant Commissioner with direction to re-decide the matter, after looking into the Registration Certificate of the dealer and in the light of the Board’s instructions can in letter F.No.76/76/94-CX dated 8.11.95 and the various precedent decisions of the Tribunal. The appeal is thus allowed by way of remand.
Dictated in the open court.