9911796707
TMI Blog2007 (11) TMI 246X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e the following question of law: "Whether the learned Tribunal has not erred in holding that the restriction under Notification No. 14/97-C.E. (N.T.), dated 3-5-1997 shall not be applicable to taking Modvat on RFO, whereas RFO is nothing but LSHS (Low Sulphur Heavy Stock) and hence covered under the ambit of Notification No. 14/97-C.E. (N.T.), dated 3rd May, 1997?" 2. The order under challenge i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... arious other judgments, including the one in the case of M/s. Camphor & Allied Product Ltd., contained in Final Order No. A/132/2002 -NB dated 28-1-2002, reported in 2002 (147) E.L.T. 600. 7. Learned counsel for the respondent pointed out, that apart from this judgment in M/s. Camphor & Allied Product Ltd. case, in Surya Roshni Ltd. v. CCE, Indore reported in 2002 (147) E.L.T. 369 (T) = 2002 (100 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d raised by the petitioner either, that those judgments have not correctly decided, or the facts in those cases are different so as to be not applicable to the present case, or that, these judgments no more hold good. In that view of the matter, since even now the learned counsel for the petitioner is not in a position to inform about the status of these judgments, we have no option but to conclud ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
