1997 (7) TMI 377

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... 15-10-1993 in respect of these demands. 2. The facts of the case are that the appellants are engaged in the manufacture of food preparations such as Maltova and Viva covered under Chapter Heading 1901.19. In the process of manufacture of these food preparations, malt extract arises. The appellants were paying duty on malt extract and taking Modvat credit on this item and utilising credit of duty so taken for payment of duty on Maltova/Viva. The Notification No. 82/87, dated 1-3-1987 inter alia provided that the goods captively consumed shall be exempted. In the instant case, the malt extract was captively consumed in the food preparations, therefore, the department alleged that since the malt extract was exempt, the question of pay....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....s under :- "In view of the ratios laid down by the Courts/Tribunal in the above noted cases, we hold that the appellant's contention that they had a choice to pay the duty on the input VAM and take the benefit on the final product under Notification No. 53/88. The issue can be viewed in a different light also and that is even if they had not availed of the benefit of Notification for the input VAM, even then the benefit of Notification No. 53/88 cannot be denied on the final product, `Polyvnyl Alcohol', in the light of the ratio of the above judgment, as the input VAM is deemed to have suffered duty, as `Nil' rate of duty, is also payment of duty." "Now, if notification is granting conditional exemption to a product, and the Notificat....