9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (1) TMI 387X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ther of the opinion that if no separate accounts were maintained, how was the separate quantification to be arrived at has also not been discussed by the Tribunal. For all the aforesaid reasons, we are satisfied that the order under appeal dated 3-11-2009 is not sustainable in its present form. It is set aside. The matter is remanded to the Tribunal for hearing the parties afresh. X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d by the same Counsel on 6-9-2010 when submission was made on its behalf that Tax Case (PR) No. 1843 of 2010 had been filed by it as cross-appeal. The order sheet of Tax Case (PR) No. 1843 of 2010 reveals that it stood dismissed for non-compliance of the peremptory order dated 29-9-2011 for removing the defects. 4. The order sheet dated 17-6-2015 adequately notices the past dates of appearances on behalf of respondent and that none was present on its behalf on the former date. The office note that no power had yet been filed on behalf of respondent was also noticed but the name of the Counsel was not appearing in the cause list. Pursuant to the directions in this regard, name of the Counsel for the respondent was printed in the cause ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... acture of exempted goods and take Cenvat credit only on that quantity of inputs which is intended for use in the manufacture of dutiable goods" 7. Learned Counsel for the appellant on basis of the aforesaid Rule submits that it was a statutory obligation of the respondent to maintain separate accounts with regard to the inputs used by it regarding electricity sold to outsiders leviable to excise duty and that used for captive consumption not liable for excise duty to avail the benefit of Cenvat credit. Our attention is also invited to Section 11A sub-clause (4) of the Central Excise Act, 1944 (hereinafter called 'the Act') which reads as follows : "Where any duty of excise has not been levied or paid or has been short-levied or shor ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d consumption under the two heads was a physical impossibility. He lastly submits that the Tribunal has completely erred in relying upon paragraph M/s. Maruti Suzuki Ltd. (supra) which related to definition of the word 'input' only and did not concern issues arising for consideration presently. 10. We have considered the submissions on behalf of the appellant. 11. A judgment of a Court has to be read in its entirety and not by culling out one paragraph of the same torn out of context. In (1987) 1 SCC 213 (Ambica Quarry Works v. State of Gujarat) it was observed : "18. ….The ratio of any decision must be understood in the background of the facts of that case. It has been said long time ago that a case is only an aut ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
