2005 (12) TMI 417

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... Shri Ganesh Havanur, SDR, for the Respondent. [Order per : T.K. Jayaraman, Member (T)]. -  This appeal is filed by the appellants against the Order-in-Appeal Nos. 69-72/2002 (H-III)-C.E., dated 30-8-2002, passed by the Commissioner of Customs & Central Excise (Appeals), Hyderabad. 2. The short point involved in this case is whether the restriction on the quantum of credit impo....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ttention the decision of the Tribunal in the case of Lloyds Steel v. CCE, Nagpur reported in 2004 (176) E.L.T. 783 (Tri.-Mumbai), wherein it is held that the restriction of Notification No. 5/97-C.E. not being applicable before 2-6-1998 as per the priviso introduced would itself indicate that the restriction as per the Notification No. 14/97-C.E. is not applicable to credit under Rule 57B. He furt....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... correct. To make things clear we reproduce Para (d) of Tribunal's decision in the case of Lloyds Steel : (d) The reliance of ld. DR on the case of Jindal Polyster [2001 (137) E.L.T. 355] is considered. It is seen that the Bench had read the Rule 57B(1) before the amendments made to it by the Notification No. 21/98-C.E. (N.T.), dated 2-6-98, i.e. in absence of the proviso clause to Rule 57....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....respect, are not applicable in the view we are taking. We are not able to apply the plea of harmonious interpretation of Rules 57A & 57B as submitted and made out in these decisions relied upon by the DR, to conclude that restrictions imposed by notification under Rule 57A(3) would automatically apply, especially after the amendments of 2-6-98 by Notification 21/98-C.E. (N.T) when parent Rule 57A(....