TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2003 (7) TMI 175
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... arisen on account of two factors :- (a) The appellant took Modvat credit on common inputs i.e. inputs which are common for exempt and dutiable pens but did not keep separate accounts or pay 8% on the exempted pens or reverse the credit. (b) The appellant gave certain special discounts and brought the value of certain pens within the exempted limit. 2. We have perused the records and heard both....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....hat the decision of the Tribunal in the case of Pushpaman Forgings has been confirmed by the Apex Court as reported in [2003 (153) E.L.T. A89 (S.C.)]. 3. Learned SDR has pointed out that since no reversal of credit was done prior to the clearance of pens in question, the facility of reversal of credit could not be available to the appellant. 4. We are not able to agree with this view of the lear....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e. As against this, the learned SDR took us to the finding in the impugned order that the appellant has brought sale price within the exempted value by giving special discounts and such a device should not be permitted. 6. We have seen sample cases involved in the dispute. One such supply is under Order dated 9th September, 1999 of Le Bouquet. This is an order for supply of 3,715 pens at a price ....