9911796707
TMI Blog2004 (10) TMI 190X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e. the Assistant/Deputy Commissioner is required to withdraw the facility and the Superintendent of Central Excise has no powers to withdraw the same and direct them to deposit the duty on consignment basis. Their plea has not been accepted. The learned Counsel submits that the demands are also time barred as it would have resulted in revenue neutrality and in this regard refers to the Supreme Court judgment rendered in the case of T.N. Dadha Pharmaceuticals v. Collector of C.Ex., Madras - 2003 (152) E.L.T. 251 (S.C.) and the following three judgments : (a) Nityanand Nirmal v. CCE - 1999 (109) E.L.T. 522 (b) CCE v. Mahavir Spinning Mills Ltd. - 2001 (130) E.L.T. 65 (c) &nbs ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ase, the Punjab & Haryana High Court in the case of Krishna Engineering Works Ltd. v. UOI (supra) has held that the Superintendent does not have the powers to withdraw the fortnightly benefit of payment in terms of Rule 173 G(1)(e) and held it to be violative of Principles of Natural justice. The Tribunal, in the case of M/s. Parkins Textiles (P) Ltd. v. CCE, by Final Order No. 1631/2004, dated 19-10-2004, has applied the ratio of the Punjab & Haryana High Court in the case of Krishna Engineering Works (supra) and that of the Apex Court judgment in the case of T.N. Dadha Pharmaceuticals v. Collector of C. Ex., Madras (supra) and has allowed the appeal. The findings recorded in para 4 are reproduced herein below : "4. On a careful considera ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ible for the benefit of Modvat credit. It would have been led to Revenue neutrality and, therefore, in terms of the Apex Court judgment rendered in the case of T.N. Dadha Pharmaceuticals v. CCE, Madras (supra), the appellants cannot be alleged to have held an intention to evade duty. The demands are also barred by time. The appellants succeed in this appeal and the same is allowed with consequential relief if any." 5. I find that the rulings rendered in the case of M/s. Parkins Textiles (P) Ltd. is in all fours and is required to be followed in terms of judicial discipline. Therefore, respectfully following the ratio of the Tribunal's rulings in the case of M/s. Parkins Textiles (P) Ltd., the impugned order is set aside and the appeal is a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
