9911796707
TMI Blog2008 (3) TMI 238X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Before the lower appellate authority, challenging the adverse order passed by the original authority, the assessee had claimed the benefit of Notification No.6/2002-CE (NT) dt. 1.3.2002 issued under Rule 11 of the CENVAT Credit Rules, 2002. This Notification (which superseded earlier Notification No.53/2001-CE (NT) issued under Rule 11 of the CENVAT Credit Rules, 2001), in para-3 thereof, allowed utilization of deemed credit on declared inputs used in the manufacture of final products cleared for export under bond, for payment of duty on any final product cleared for home consumption or for export on payment of duty. The Commissioner (Appeals) allowed this benefit to the respondents by extending the applicability of the first proviso ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ts that both the matters are still pending before the High Courts and that the present appeal can be kept in abeyance, awaiting the decision of the Hon'ble High Courts. In answer to a query from the Bench, ld. SDR submits that there is no stay of operation of the Tribunal's decision in either of the cases. 3. The reason stated in the present appeal as a ground against the decision of the lower appellate authority is that the decision of the Larger Bench in Hunsur Plywood Works case and the decision of this Bench in the respondents' earlier case cannot be considered to have attained finality on account of pendency of the aforesaid question of law before the Hon'ble High Courts. Ld. SDR has reiterated this ground of the appeal. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sent case, cannot make a plea for keeping the present appeal pending on the ground of pendency of referred issue before the High Courts. After overruling the plea made by ld. SDR, I proceed to deal with the appeal. 6. The issue arising in this case is whether, in terms of the first proviso to para-3 of Notification No.6/2002-CE (NT), the respondents are entitled to avail deemed credit on the cotton yarn (declared input) used by them in the manufacture of fabrics which were cleared to 100% EOUs for export during the period of dispute. This issue is no different from the one considered by this Bench in the respondents' own case and held in their favour as per Final Order No.115-116/02 dt. 25.1.02. In that case, the question pertained ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
