Customs, Excise and Gold Tribunal - Delhi
Commissioner Of C. Ex vs Metro Tyres Ltd. on 27 July, 2000
Equivalent citations: 2001(136)ELT396(TRI-DEL)
ORDER P.G. Chacko, Member (J)
1. The respondents are manufacturers of cycle and moped chains. While cycle chains are exempt from duty, moped chains are not. The respondents took Modvat credit of the duty paid on inputs used for the manufacture of moped chains. But moped chains are exported while cycle chains are cleared for home consumption. The credit accumulated in respect of inputs utilised for the manufacture of the exported moped chains is utilised for payment of duty on scrap generated from the process of manufactured of cycle chains.
2. The Modvat credit taken as above by the respondents during various periods in 1995 and 1996 were disallowed by the adjudicating authority. But the lower appellate authority allowed the credits by relying on the Tribunal's decision vide Final order No. A/986/97-NB, dated 23-10-1997 [since reported in 1998 (100) E.L.T. 362]. The present appeals are against the orders of the Commissioner (Appeals). The only ground stated by the Appellant/Revenue in these appeals is that the Department's reference application filed against final order dated 23-10-1997 ibid, is pending. Ld. JDR Shri V.M. Udhoji now submits that the said reference application has since been allowed. The mere pendency of a reference before any High Court is, however, no ground for interfering with the order of the lower appellate authority as long as there is no stay of operation of that order.
3. Ld. Counsel for the respondents has drawn my attention to two decisions of this Tribunal which cover the issue in their favour. The two decisions are Final Order No. A/234-235/98-NB(S), dated 18-3-1998 (since reported in 1998 (102) E.L.T. 385] and also Final Order No. A/986/97-NB (SM), dated 23-10-1997 [since reported in 1998 (100) E.L.T. 362]. I have perused the copies of these orders placed on record by ld. Advocate and I find that the issue involved in the present appeals is squarely covered in favour of the respondents. I would follow these decisions of the Tribunal to decide the present appeals.
4. The Department's appeals are without any merit in the light of the aforecited decisions of the Tribunal on the issue. The appeals are, therefore, rejected.