2006 (9) TMI 414

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

...., DR, for the Respondent. [Order]. -  Heard both sides and perused record. 2. The facts of the case are that the appellant was a manufacturer of Prestressed Cement Concrete Pipes which are liable to Central Excise duty. The appellant was availing itself of Modvat credit on inputs used in such manufacture. Input credit so taken was utilised for payment of duty on these pipes. ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ll inasmuch as, Cenvat credit had been correctly taken and correctly utilized before the exemption came into force with effect from 3-10-2002.This objection of the appellant was rejected and demand confirmed in adjudication and appeal. Commissioner (Appeals) has specifically relied on the decision of this Tribunal in the case of Albert David Ltd. v. C.C.E., Meerut - 2003 (151) E.L.T. 443 in suppor....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....dvat credit scheme. Learned counsel would submit that since law on the subject remains directly settled by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Dai Ichi Karkaria, the judgment of this Tribunal in the case of Albert David Ltd. would have no application. 6. The learned DR would point out that facts in the present case are the same as in the case covered by the Tribunal in the case of Alb....