9911796707
TMI Blog1994 (9) TMI 159X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... , JDR, for the Respondent. [Order per : K. Sankararaman, Member (T)]. - Shri Y.N. Chopra, learned Consultant is present on behalf of the appellants. He states that he does not have any information as to the present status of the Writ Petition filed by them before the Honourable High Court of Madhya Pradesh at Indore challenging the order of the Collector of Central Excise (Appeals) New Delhi wh ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... second item, namely oxygen gas/acetylene gas used by them in their manufacturing process, he referred to the Tribunal decision in Collector of Central Excise v. Hindustan Development Corporation reported in 1990 (47) E.L.T. 376. He then stated that as regards packaging materials, the same has been used for packaging ramming mass received by them. He then submitted that the notice issued in this c ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e and we respectfully follow the said decisions and allow the appeal. As regards the third item namely packaging materials, the same are stated to be used for packaging the inputs namely ramming mass. When the ramming mass itself has been held to be eligible for modvat credit, the packaging materials used for them and the value of which is included in the assessable value of the latter, has to be ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nataka High Court in Tungabhadra Steel Products Ltd. v. Superintendent of Central Excise reported in 1991 (56) E.L.T. 340 and the Madras High Court in Advani Oerlikon Ltd. v. Assistant Collector of Central Excise reported in 1993 (63) E.L.T. 427 but we are also aware of a contrary judgment rendered by the Honourable Gujarat High Court in the case of Torrent Laboratories v. Union of India reported ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hin a period of six months in normal cases. We are however not going into the said question as the appeal has been allowed by us on merits. 6. The Collector of Central Excise, Indore has filed a cross-objection in the same matter. The plea therein is only for the disallowance of the appeal and the upholding of the order-in-appeal. The cross-objection is misconceived and is not maintainable. As we ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
