ORDER
T.V. Sairam, Member (T)
1. There are two appeals filed by Pondy Oxides & Chemicals Ltd., relating to the same issue in respect of different periods. The short question here is whether the assessee is eligible for Modvat credit taken on furnace oil for which invoices filed do not indicate the correct amount of duty.
2. Ld. SDR relies upon the construction of Rule 57A read with Rule 571, which indicates that to be eligible for availing Modvat credit, it is necessary that the proof of payment of duty on the inputs is essentially to be made available to the Department. Sub-rule 1 of Rule 57A reads as under:
The provisions of this section shall apply to such finished excisable goods (hereafter, in this section, referred to as the final products) as the Central Government may by notification in the Official Gazette, additional ditty under Section 3 of the Customs Tariff Act, 1975 (51 of 1975), as may be specified in the said notification (hereinafter, in this section, referred to as the specified duty) paid on the goods used in the manufacture of the said final products (hereinafter, in this section, referred to as the inputs)
2. Ld. SDR states that in the relevant invoice issued by M/s HPCL, the duty was wrongly calculated and the duty arrived at was far higher than what was actually to be. In view of this, the Department had allowed credit in respect of the correct duty amount and not the duty amount, as shown in the invoice.
3. None represented the respondent, despite notice nor was there any request from them for adjournment. Hence the matter was taken up. I have examined the case records. A plain reading of Rule 57(1) indicates that to be eligible for Modvat credit, it is essential that the proof of payment of duty is furnished by the assesse. Although, in this case, the invoices were furnished, the Department had noticed that the quantum of duty arrived at by the supplier was on a higher side and hence the Department took the pain of recalculating the same, so as to arrive at the correct duty amount, which was justifiably allowed to the appellant. I, therefore, consider that there should be no grievance at all on this count, from the appellants’ side. In view of this, the appeal is dismissed.
(Dictated and pronounced in open Court).