TMI Blog2007 (2) TMI 525X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... espondent. [Order per : T.K. Jayaraman, Member (T)]. This appeal has been filed against Order-in-Appeal No. 122/2002-CE, dated 20-12-2002 passed by the Commissioner of Customs Central Excise (Appeals), Hyderabad. 2. The short point in this appeal is the disallowance of Modvat credit on the ground that the credit had been availed beyond the period of six months from the date of duty p ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Narahari Shivaram Set Narvekar v. Pannalal Umediram - AIR 1977 SC 164. (c) Memon Abdul Karim Haji Tayab v. Deputy Custodian General of New Delhi - AIR 1964 SC 1256 4. The learned JDR Shri K. Sambi Reddy urged that prior to 1-4-2000, there was a stipulation that the Modvat credit should be taken within six months from the date of duty paying documents. In such a case, the amendment to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nal Delhi) Distinguished in 2001 (128) E.L.T. 311 (Commissioner (Appeals)) Relied in 2001 (131) E.L.T. 109 (Tribunal Delhi) Relied in 2001 (131) E.L.T. 137 (Tribunal Delhi) Referred in 2001 (131) E.L.T. 140 (Tribunal Delhi) Followed in 2001 (132) E.L.T. 401 (Tribunal Delhi) Referred in 2001 (134) E.L.T. 662 (Tribunal Larger Bench) ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 5 (187) E.L.T. 355 (Tribunal Madras/Chennai) Relied in 2005 (191) E.L.T. 759 (Tribunal Delhi) The Larger Bench decision on which the impugned order relies has not been overruled by any higher fora. Moreover, the Apex Court s decision relied by the learned Advocate relates to certain property suits. The learned advocate has not brought out clearly how those decisions would be relevant i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 4-2000. To argue that for the entire period, the amendment of 1-4-2000 should prevail does not make much sense. If that view is taken, there is no need for any amendment at all. Legal provisions change from time to time and it cannot be argued that the provision existing in one period should be applied to some other period to suit the convenience of the appellants. 6.2 Summing up, we do not find ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
