TMI Blog2008 (8) TMI 109X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sal of an appeal, the same would constitute an error apparent on the face of the record by reason of applicability of the doctrine of per incuriam - Therefore, the final order is recalled. The application stands allowed - E/794/2005 - 347/2008 - Dated:- 13-8-2008 - Shri P.G. Chacko, Member (J) Shri R. Parthasarathy, Consultant, for the Appellant. Shri N.J. Kumaresh, SDR, for the Res ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... held that CENVAT credit on explosives used for blasting limestone in mines away from the cement factory could not be denied on the ground that they were not used as inputs within the factory. The learned Consultant has also referred to the Apex Court's later decision in Vikram Cement v. Commissioner of Central Excise, Indore [2006] (197) E.L.T. 145 (S.C.) wherein it was decided thus: "Insofa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n issue will arise for consideration. In this connection, the learned SDR relies on the Apex Court's judgment in Osram Surya (P) Ltd. v. Commissioner of Central Excise, Indore [2002] (142) E.L.T. 5 (S.C.)], wherein the amendment brought to Rule 57G of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 by Notification No. 28/95-C.E. (N.T.) providing for a period of limitation of six months for a avilment of MODVAT ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ndustan Lever Ltd. v. Commissioner of Central Excise, Mumbai-I [2002 (202) E.L.T 177 (Tribunal-LB) = 2008 (10) S.T.R. 91 (Tri.-LB)]. The five-member Larger Bench overruled the contra view taken by the three-member Larger Bench in Gujarat State Fertilizers and Chemicals v. Commissioner [2006] (122) E.L.T. 282 (Tri.-LB)]. The prevailing view is the one taken by the five-member Larger Bench and ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
