Mehinder Singh Sullar, J.

1. As common question of law and facts are involved in both the aforementioned reference petitions, therefore, we propose to decide the same, vide this single judgment, in order to avoid the repetition. However, for facilitation, the facts have been extracted from GCR No. 18 of 2004 titled as

#28;Commissioner of Central Excise, Chandigarh v. Khalsa Charan Singh and Sons#29;.

2. The matrix of facts, culminating in the commencement, relevant for disposal, of present reference petitions and emanating from the record is that the respondent-assessee M/s. Khalsa Charan Singh and sons (for brevity #28;the assessee#29;) was dealing in old rollable material/re-rollable material and scrap. A show cause notice was issued to the assessee, proposing to deny proforma credit availed by it under the modvat scheme, on the ground that as the #28;old rollable material/re-rollable material and scrap#29; is not specified in the Government of India#25;s Order No. B-22/5/86- TRU, dated 7-4-1986, therefore, it (assessee) is not entitled to modvat credit without production of evidence of payment of duty. The Assistant Commissioner, Central Excise denied the proforma credit