TMI Blog2009 (6) TMI 846X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Respondent. [Order per : Archana Wadhwa, Member (J)]. - After hearing both sides duly represented by Shri M.A. Patel, learned Consultant on behalf of the appellant and Shri Sameer Chitkara, learned SDR, on behalf of the Revenue, we find that the appellant is a manufacturer of P P medicines. Some of the final products of the appellant are dutiable and some of them are exempted goods. The a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ount of the value of the exempted final product in terms of provisions of Rule 6 of Cenvat Credit Rules. In his impugned order, the CCE Ahmedabad confirmed the demand of Rs. 70,80,591/- along with imposition of penalty of identical amount. The said order is impugned before us. 4. It is the appellant s contention that by reversing the credit along with interest, the position which emerges was as ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e numbers of CESTAT s decisions which are in favour of the noticee. However, he has referred to Board s Circulars, issued in 2002 and 2003, saying that the assessee has no option to reverse 8% of the price of the exempted product in terms of provisions of Rule 6. He has further observed that in the case of conflicting decisions between Board s instructions and judgment of Tribunal, the adjudicatin ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... where the Board s circular is in favour of the assessee; the adjudicating authority cannot take a view against them. Where the Board s instructions are in conflict (if at all) with the Hon ble Supreme Court s decision and the Tribunal s decision, the judicial discipline requires the adjudicating authority to follow the orders of higher appellate forum. 9. In view of the above, we set aside the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
