2000 (8) TMI 549

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... Appellant. Shri R. Babu, JDR, for the Respondents. [Order]. -  These three appeals were taken up together. Appeal Nos. E/1698-99/2000 arises out of one impugned order where under five adjudication orders were disposed of. Appeal No. E/1846/2000 arises out of a different impugned order. But since the issue in all the three appeals is the same, they were heard together and are being d....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ts for purpose of Modvat. 3. Shri J P. Kaushik, ld. Counsel submits that Larger Benches of this Tribunal first in the case of C.C.E., Meerut v. Steel Manufacturing Co. reported in 2000 (119) E.L.T. 290 (Tri. - LB)=2000 (39) RLT 197 held that the defective goods returned to the manufacturers for remaking are inputs for purpose of Modvat. He submits further that again in the case of C.C.E., ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... that defective goods returned are inputs for purpose of Modvat. He, therefore, submits that in view of the Larger Bench decisions and particular decision on their own product covers their product clearly and therefore, prays that the appeals may be allowed. 4. Shri R. Babu, ld. DR reiterates the findings of the authorities below. 5. I have heard the submissions of the ld. Counsel ....