9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (8) TMI 1023X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tly with Mr. J. B. Mishra, for the Applicant/Appellant. Mr. Sachin Chitnis with Mr. Kiran Chavan i/b. Cenex Services, for the Respondent. P.C: The Notice of Motion has been taken out by the Applicant for condonation of delay of 525 days delay in taking out this application for setting aside the order dated 30th November, 2015 passed by the Prothonotary and Senior Master. The impugned order date ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ion 35G of the Central Excise Act, 1944 (the Act), challenges the order dated 29th December, 2006 passed by the Central Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (the Tribunal). 6. The Revenue has urged the following reframed question of law for our consideration: "Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, was the Tribunal justified in allowing CENVAT Credit on input ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... heading 4901.90 of the Tariff Act, 1985. Thus, chargeable to 'Nil' rate of duty. Therefore, the consequent taking of credit by the Respondent was sought to be denied. 8. The Tribunal by the impugned order dated 29th December, 2006 allowed the Respondent's appeal by taking note of the order of its co-ordinate bench in the case of M/s. Paper Products Ltd., v/s. Commissioner of Central Excise 19 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of the inputs under Chapter 39 of the Tariff Act, 1985 as claimed by M/s. Paper Products Ltd., and not under Chapter 40 of the Tariff Act, 1985 as claimed by the Revenue. In view of the the decision of the Supreme Court, there is no question, much less any substantial question of law, which remains to be resolved. 10. In the above view, as the Revenue is not disputing (in view of the Apex Court& ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
