TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2001 (11) TMI 872
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... the Respondent. [Order]. - In this appeal of the Revenue, the appellant is represented by ld. JDR, Shri Hitesh Shah. The respondents have waived personal hearing and have requested for a decision on merits. 2.. I have heard ld. JDR, who has reiterated the grounds of appeal. 3.. This appeal is against the order of the Commissioner (Appeals) allowing Modvat credit to the assessee on ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... eligible inputs by the lower appellate authority. The ground on which this decision of the lower appellate authority has been challenged is that the question whether the goods were inputs or not was not before that authority. This ground is not sustainable inasmuch as it has been consistently held by this Tribunal that if, in relation to goods on which Modvat credit is taken by an assessee, it is....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... 3 (S.C.)] [2001 (45) RLT 439]. The Revenue has also relied on the Tribunal's decision in the case of Shanmugaraja Spinning Mills - [1997 (89) E.L.T. 84 (Tribunal)]. This, again, does not advance the appellant's case inasmuch as, in the case of Jawahar Mills Ltd. [1999 (108) E.L.T. 47 (Tribunal)], the Tribunal has held that the view taken in Shanmugaraja Spinning Mills (Supra) is not good law. It ....