2006 (2) TMI 358

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... .4 lakhs. 2. I have perused the record and heard the learned SDR. The appellant has not appeared for hearing but has filed a written submission. The same is also being taken into account. 3. The relevant facts are that the appellant is a manufacturer of iron and steel, bars, rods etc. It was availing Modvat credit on inputs . While so, in the year 1988, the appellant s final product was exemp .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... lapse and could not be carried forward under any circumstances since the input in question had been utilized for production of exempted good 4. The contention of the appellant in the present appeal is that there is no bar to carrying forward of the Modvat credit. Reliance has also been placed on the decision of this Tribunal in the case of C.C.E., Cus, Bhopal v. Bombay Barmah Trading Corpn Lt .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X