TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2004 (5) TMI 132
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ceeding Rs. 500/- were exempted from payment of duty under Notification No. 6/2000-C.E., dated 1-3-2000. The issue involved in this case is whether the appellants were liable to reverse MODVAT/CENVAT credit amounting to Rs. 4,22,434/- which they had already availed in respect of duty-paid inputs lying as such in stock as on 29-2-2000 as well as duty-paid inputs contained in the final products lying in stock as on the said date and cleared at 'Nil' rate of duty (under the above Notification) on or after 1-3-2000. The original authority, following the Tribunal's Larger Bench decision in Khanbhai Esoofbhai v. Collector [1999 (107) E.L.T. 557] and the CBEC Circular No. 591/28/2001/C.E., dated 16-10-2001, held that the assessee was liable to rev....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....pra). The said decision required to be followed in the instant case in the absence of any stay of operation of the decision, by the Supreme Court. Ld. Consultant also relied on the judgment of the Kerala High Court in C.C.E., Cochin v. Premier Tyres Ltd. [2001 (130) E.L.T. 417] as also on the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in C.C.E. v. Dai Ichi Karkaria Ltd. [1999 (112) E.L.T. 353 (S.C.)]. Ld. DR, on the other hand, submitted that the decision of the Tribunal's Larger Bench in the case of Raghuvar (India) Ltd. v. C.C.E. [2002 (140) E.L.T. 280] had to be followed in the instant case. On the limitation issue, ld. DR submitted that, as the return for the month of March 2000 had been submitted by the assessee on 5-4-2000, the limitation ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....acated that of the latter. In their appeal against the order of the Commissioner (Appeals), the assessee has relied mainly on the Tribunal's Larger Bench decision in Ashok Iron & Steel Fabricators (supra). In the Revenue's appeal, it has been submitted that they have not accepted the said decision of the Larger Bench and have preferred appeal against it to the Supreme Court. Ld. DR, however, has not claimed that there is any stay of operation of the Tribunal's decision. 4.In the case of Ashok Iron & Steel Fabricators, the issue considered by the Larger Bench was whether Modvat credit availed and utilized when the final products were dutiable was liable to be reversed subsequently on the final products being exempted from duty. Relying on....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....jected. Sd/- (P.G. Chacko) Member (J) [Contra6. per : V.K. Agrawal, Member (T)]. - I have the opportunity of perusing the Order as recorded by learned Member (Judicial). I, however, find myself unable to agree with the Order as far as it allows the appeal filed by M/s. Sunsui India Limited. The Commissioner (Appeals), under the impugned Order has disallowed the Modvat Credit amounting to Rs. 3,00,173/- pertaining to inputs lying in stock as on 1-3-2000 following the decision of the Larger Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Raghuvar (India) Ltd. v. C.C.E., Delhi, 2002 (140) E.L.T. 280 (T-LB)....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....; Sd/- (V.K. Agrawal) Member (T) DIFFERENCE OF OPINION Whether the appeal filed by M/s. Sunsui India Limited is to be allowed as ordered by the learned Member (Judicial) or the appeal is to be rejected as ordered by the learned Member (Technical). Sd/- (P.G.Chacko) Member (J) Sd/- (V.K. Agrawal) Member (T) 9.[Order per : S.S. Kang, Member (J)]. - Heard both sides. 10.In this case the dispute is regarding the reversal of unutilized input credit when subsequently the final product is exempted from payment of Central Excise duty. The contention of the appellant is that when the credit was taken, the final product, manufactured out of the inputs on which the credit was taken,....