1999 (8) TMI 190

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... , for the Respondent. [Order]. -  The appellants filed this appeal against the order-in-appeal dated 30-4-1998 passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals). In this case the benefit of Modvat credit on capital goods on 14 items is denied to the appellant. Learned Shri Pramod Banthia, C.A. appearing on behalf of the appellants submits that the benefit of Modvat credit is denied aft .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... 5 and Notification No. 14/96-C.E., dated 23-7-1996. He, therefore, prays that the matter be remanded to the adjudicating authority for reconsideration in the light of the Larger Bench decision of the Tribunal in the case of Jawahar Mills Ltd. (supra). 2. Learned JDR appearing on behalf of the Revenue have no objection. 3. Heard both sides. 4. In this case the benefit of Modvat credits as capita .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... . v. Commissioner of Central Excise, Coimbatore, (supra) explained the scope of the Rule 57Q of the Central Excise Rules, 1944. The judgment of the Larger Bench of the Tribunal was not available at the time of passing of the impugned order. In these circumstances, the impugned order is set aside and the matter is remanded to the adjudicating authority for de novo adjudication and to decide the iss .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X