9911796707
TMI Blog2005 (8) TMI 550X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... [Order]. Heard both sides. 2. Common issue involved in both the appeals, therefore, are being taken up together. 3. The brief facts of the case are that the appellants filed declaration for availing the benefit of Notification No. 16/97-C.E., dated 1-4-97 and during the same financial year another notification was issued by the Revenue i.e. 38/97-C.E. Under this notification Modvat cr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... an opt out Notification No. 16/97-C.E. but to avail the Modvat with higher concessional rate, but to avail the benefit of Notification No. 38/97-C.E. declaration is to be filed. As no declaration has been filed by the appellants for availing the benefit of Notification No. 38/97-C.E. The benefit of this notification is not admissible to the appellant and denied the benefit of Modvat credit 4. Th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... entitled for the benefit of this Notification. The Revenue relied upon the decision of the Tribunal in the case of Karm Sanitations v. CCE reported in 2001 (129) E.L.T. 101 wherein the similar situation the credit has been denied. 6. In reply, the contention of the appellant is that the facts of the case in the case of Karm Sanitations (supra) are different. In that case, the Tribunal had gone b ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... No. 16/97-C.E. and provisions of Notification No. 38/97-C.E. held that the assessee once opted for small scale exemption Notification i.e. 16/97 they could not out in the same financial year and they were barred from taking the Modvat credit of the duty paid on inputs till the aggregate value of the clearances exceed Rs. One crore. In the present case the Commissioner (Appeals) in the impugned or ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
