9911796707
TMI Blog2011 (6) TMI 88X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... or the purposes of exemption - Held that: as per the case of EL.P.EM. Industries, find that there is no merit in the Revenue appeals and are compelled not to interfere with the order in order in Appeal impugned - Hence, the issue stands decided in favour of the assessee, set-aside the impugned order and allow the appeal with consequential relief to the appellants. - E/2718 of 2006 - - - Dated:- 10-6-2011 - Mrs. Archana Wadhwa, Dr. P. Babu, JJ. For Appellant : Shri Vipul Khandhar, Chartered Accountant For Respondent : Shri Rajendra Nagar, SDR Per : Mrs. Archana Wadhwa; After hearing both the sides, we find that the appellant is engaged in the manufacture of Body Building on the duty paid Chassis, classifiable unde ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... omputed by taking into consideration the overall clearances, including clearances made on payment of duty and as such, excess clearance in respect of one item would result in lowering down the exemption in respect of the second item, but we find that the said Larger Bench decision stand taken note of and discussed in many subsequent judgments of the Tribunal and was not being followed on the ground that, the earlier order of the Tribunal laying down to the contrary stand, confirmed by the Hon ble Supreme Court when the Revenue s appeal filed there against was dismissed. For ready reference, we may refer to the Tribunal s decision in the case of CCE, Indore vs. Neo Era Agro Engineering 2000 (124) ELT 665 (Tribunal). Para 4 of the said judgme ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ted 25-9-1998 [1999 (107) E.L.T. 596 (T)] has also given the similar findings. We therefore find that the matter is no longer res integra and therefore respectfully following the ratio of the above said decisions in the case of EL.P.EM. Industries (supra) we find that there is no merit in the Revenue appeals and we are compelled not to interfere with the order in order in Appeal impugned. The Revenue Appeal is therefore dismissed. 3. It is also submitted that the Revenue s appeal filed against the said order of the Tribunal was rejected by the Hon ble Supreme Court as reported in 2001 (127) ELT A-47 (SC). Inasmuch as the issue stands decided in favour of the assessee, we set-aside the impugned order and allow the appeal with consequen ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
