2005 (8) TMI 9

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....5 dated 24.03.2005 passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise, Bangalore. 2. The facts of the case are as follows. With effect from 09.07.2004, Tractors were exempted from payment of duty. As on 08.07.2004, the appellant had a closing stock of finished goods, namely; tractors of 319 numbers, which were manufactured using the inputs on which credit of duty was availed. On the same day, the app....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....hey have approached this Tribunal for relief. 4. Mr. Rajesh Chander Kumar, the —learned Advocate appeared for the appellants and Mr. Ganesh Havanur, the learned SDR appeared for Revenue. 5. The learned Advocate adduced the following arguments. (a) Once the credit is validly taken, then the benefit is available to the manufacturer without any limitation in time. (b) The above principl....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....hich declared law. For a declaration of law under article 141 of the Constitution by the Supreme Court, a speaking order is necessary as held in the case of S. Shanmugavel Nadar Vs. State of Tamil Nadu. (f) The adjudicating authority erred in applying the decisions of the Tribunal in the case of Albert David and Explicit Trading & Marketing (P) Ltd. The said decision was per incuriurn and theTr....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....he decision of the Apex Court in Dai lchi case -1999 (33) RLT 899 (SC)=1999 (112) ELT 353 (SC). Moreover, the Larger Bench in the case of Commissioner of Central Excise, Rajkot Vs. Ashok Iron & Steel Fabricators - 2002 (48) RLT 789 (CEGAT -LB)=2002 (140) ELT 277 has held that credit need not be reversed when subsequently final product is exempted from duty; credit having been taken validly and its....