TMI Blog2017 (3) TMI 1152X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Agrawal,Piyush Agrawal ORDER We have heard Sri Bharat Ji Agarwal learned senior counsel assisted by Ms.Sanyogita Singh learned counsel for the appellant and Sri Praveen Kumar learned counsel for the department and have also perused the record. As the controversy involved in these appeals is identical, the same is being decided by a common judgment and order treating the Central Excise Appeal no.248 of 2009 as the leading case. The Central Excise Appeal no.248 of 2009 has been filed by the department against the order of Custom,Excise Service Tax Appellate Tribunal dated 26.8.2008 by which the tribunal has dismissed the appeal filed by the department. The appeal has been filed proposing the following seven questions of law: ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e tribunal has misapplied and misinterpreted the ratio of its own earlier final order dated 14.8.2000 reported in 2001 (130) ELT 93 (-Del). The relied upon ratio pertains to the case where the assessee were asked by the department to pay an amount equal to 8% of the price second category of final product i.e. Indian Made Foreign Liquor (IMFL) manufactured out of the Rectified Spirit (RS). The tribunal set aside the departmental order and held that 8% of sale price of Rs.i.e. first category of final product was chargeable under erstwhile Rule 57-CC/57-AD of CER, 1944. Thus the relied upon case has no relevance to the instant case? 6. Whether the Rule 57AD is applicable in respect of the levy molasses which is used by the manufacturer e ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... eal is as to whether the appellants are entitled to avail Modvat credit in respect of levy molasses used for manufacture of spirit which is turn was used by them for the manufacture of the country liquor and whether provisions of Rule 57CC of the Rules were applicable to them or not. This very issue came up for debate and discussions/adjudication before the Tribunal in the appellant's own earlier case wherein the Modvat credit, in the similar circumstances, was sought to be denied by the Revenue on the levy molasses used by the appellants for manufacture of rectified spirit which was thereafter used for the manufacture of Indian made foreign liquor (IMFL) (Non-excisable). The tribunal vide final order dated 27.3.2000 held that the appel ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... to Adjudicating Authority to determine amount at the rate of 8% per cent, payable or reversible, by assessee in terms of Rule 57CC and also to decide question of imposition of penalty, if any, imposed on assessee in the light of discussions made in the judgment of tribunal. Thus the disputes stand settled in so far as its entitlement to Modvat credit upto the extent of 8% of the value of rectified spirit cleared by the respondents inasmuch it has now stand decided that the respondent assessee is entitled to that much of Modvat credit. In the instant case, there is no dispute of claim in excess of 8% of the value of rectified spirit by way of Modvat credit inasmuch as the tribunal has by its impugned order, held the respondent asse ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
