Custom, Excise & Service Tax Tribunal
M/S Tuftwen Petrochemicals vs Commissioner Of Central Excise, ... on 2 January, 2018
IN THE CUSTOMS, EXCISE & SERVICE TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL REGIONAL BENCH : ALLAHABAD COURT No. I APPEAL No.E/164/2010-EX[DB] (Arising out of Order-in-Original No. 35/COMMR/M-II/2009 dated 23/10/2009 passed by Commissioner of Central Excise & Customs, Meerut-II) M/s Tuftwen Petrochemicals Appellant Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise, Meerut-II Respondent
Appearance:
Ms Stuti Saggi, Advocate for Appellant Shri Mohammad Altaf, Assistant Commissioner (AR), for Respondent CORAM: Honble Smt. Archana Wadhwa, Member (Judicial) Honble Mr. Anil G. Shakkarwar, Member (Technical) Date of Hearing : 02/01/2018 Date of Decision : 02/01/2018 FINAL ORDER NO-70071/2018 Per: Archana Wadhwa
The issue required to be decided in the present appeal is as to whether the Special Boiling Point Sprits (SBPS) used by the appellant in the manufacture of Adhesives and Organic Solvent can be considered to be as eligible inputs for the purpose of Cenvat credit. The lower authorities, by observing that the said SBPS cannot be considered to be an input, disallowed the credit and confirmed the demand along with interest and imposition of penalties.
2. It is seen that the said disputed issue came before the Tribunal in the appellants own case and vide Final Order No.267-270/05-V dated 18.02.2005 the dispute was resolved in favour of the appellant. However, when the said decision of the Tribunal was placed before Commissioner (Appeals), he did not follow the same on the ground that revenue has not accepted the said order of the Tribunal and has filed an appeal before the Honble High Court of Allahabad.
3. Apart from the facts that filing of an appeal against the Tribunals order before the High Court does not take away the effect of that decision, in the absence of any stay order by the higher appellate forum, we note that the appeal filed by the revenue stands withdrawn from the High Court and stands dismissed by the Honble High Court vide its order dated 02.08.2017.
4. In view of the above, the precedent decision of the Tribunal in the appellants own case would apply to the facts of the present case.
5. Accordingly, the impugned order is set aside and appeal is allowed with consequential relief to the appellant.
(Dictated in Court) (Anil G. Shakkarwar) Member (Technical) (Archana Wadhwa) Member (Judicial) akp 1 2 APPEAL No.E/164/2010-EX[DB]