2001 (11) TMI 872

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....-representative, for 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 ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....icals, which were also held to be 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 cred....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....wahar Mills Ltd. [2001 (132) E.L.T. 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....