2007 (1) TMI 431

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... e Respondent. [Order]. - When the case was called, none appeared on behalf of the respondents. The notice issued to the respondents received back with the postal remark that the factory is closed. 2. Heard the learned SDR. The Revenue filed this appeal against the impugned order. The Revenue is challenging only the amount of Rs. 65,927/-which was allowed by way of Modvat credit in respect .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... n the ground that declaration filed under sub-rule (i) does not contain all the details required to be contained therein. The decision relied upon by the appellants are prior to this amendment and are not applicable to the facts of present case. In the case of Kamakhya Steels v. CCE [2000 (121) E.L.T. 247], the Tribunal held that this amendment is applicable to pending cases also. In the present c .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X