TMI Blog2001 (2) TMI 237X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of the CER respectively. Since these rules were omitted from the statute with effect from 1-4-2000, the parties/Authorised Representative were asked to address the arguments on maintainability of the appeals in view of the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of Kholapur Cane Sugar Works Ltd. v. UOI reported in 2000 (119) E.L.T. 257 (S.C.). 2.Shri Ravindran appearing for the appellants M/s. Wipro Ltd., in Appeals E/289/96, E/1511-1515/96 submitted that the proceedings were initiated in terms of Rule 57K and since the relevant provisions were omitted from the statute, he has nothing to add further in view of the decision of the Supreme Court referred to above and leaves it to the Bench to pass an appropriate order. 3.Shri. B.V. Kuma ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 00 and in his case order was passed on 8-8-2000 and accordingly appeal is maintainable as impugned order was subsequent to the omission of Rules. 5.Shri Parameswaran, appearing for the appellants M/s. Pearl Polymers Ltd., (E/1373/96), M/s. Amco Batteries (E/3256/98), (E/3216-3220/98) and M/s. Automotive Axels Ltd., (E/1345/98), (E/3047-3048/98) submitted that the issue involved herein has already been settled by the decision of the Supreme Court in the Case of Kholapur Cane Sugar Works Ltd. v. UOI reported in 2000 (119) E.L.T. 257 (S.C.). Since the judgment was rendered by the Apex Court and that too being a law of the land same is binding. In this connection he also drew our attention to the Departmental Instruction No. 18/GL-18/2000 I.M ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the Supreme Court in the case of Mathew M. Thomas v. Commissioner of Income Tax reported in 1999 (111) E.L.T. 4 (S.C.). Accordingly since the relevant rules were omitted from the statute, starting from Show Cause Notice nothing survives including appeal before the Tribunal. He requested that Tribunal by exercising inherent jurisdiction may direct the Department to return the pre-deposit amount which has already been paid in terns of Section 35F of the Act, in pursuance of the stay order. 6.Shri. Lakshminarayan appearing for the appellants M/s. Bellar Steels Ltd. and M/s. Mohan Aluminium (P) Ltd. in Appeal Nos. E/S/6/2000-E/17/2000 and E/S/2-5/2001-E/4-7/2001 submitted that the appeal is maintainable but the proceedings initiated under the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... -3-2000. In that Notification it was specified that for Rules 57A to 57U of the said rules (old rules) the following rules shall be substituted with effect from 1st day of April, 2000. In effect the old Rules were omitted and old rules were replaced by new CENVAT Rules. In the new Rules transitional provision is provided under Rule 57H as under :- "Transitional provision.57H. - Any amount of credit earned by a manufacturer under Rules 57A, 57B or 57Q, as they existed prior to 1st day of April, 2000 and remaining unutilised on that day shall be allowable as Cenvat credit to such manufacturer." 10.Further the said Cenvat Rules, were amended, by Notification No. 27/2000, dated 31-3-2000 by renumbering transitional provision under 57H as 57 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... applicable to such a situation is an issue to be considered herein. 11.In the case of Malati Devi v. CCE reported in 1991 (56) E.L.T. 374, the Tribunal has taken a view that pending proceedings are saved by Section 6 of the General Clauses Act and the Tribunal is competent to hear the appeals arising out of pre-existing Gold Control Act even after its repeal in the absence of the saving clause. This position was clarified by the Supreme Court in the case of Kholapur Cane Sugar (supra) observing that proceeding pending under a rule lapses on repeal of that rule without saving clause. It was held that :- "Repeal of Rules. - Effect of Section 6 of General Clauses Act applies only in respect of a Central Act or Regulation and not to repeal ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r a pending proceeding will continue or lapse. If there is a provision therein that pending proceedings shall continue and be disposed of under the old Rules as if the rule has not been deleted or omitted then such a proceeding will continue. If the case is covered by Section 6 of the General Clauses Act or there is a pari materia provision in the statute under which the rule has been framed in that case also the pending proceeding will not be affected by omission of the Rule. In the absence of any such provision in the statute or in the rule the pending proceedings would lapse on the rule under which the notice was issued or proceeding was initiated/being deleted/omitted. It is relevant to note here that in the present case the question of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
