Abs Industries Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of C. Ex. and Cus.

1. these applications are for early hearing of the appeals which is posted for hearing today. when these applications were argued by the ld. counsel, it was thought fit that the appeals could themselves be taken up for disposal, as the question involved is already covered by the decision of the tribunal in respect of the same assessee in appeal no. e/1236/98 in order nos. 1487-88/98, dated 13-7-1998 [1999 (112) e.l.t. 854 (t)].2. the appellant manufactures acrylonitrite betadiene styrene (abs) and sand resins. some consignment of the goods which were cleared on payment of duty and supplied to the customers, were returned as not meeting the requirement of the contract of the assessee and the buyers.these goods were returned for reprocessing. it is contended that consideration of technology and economy require such reprocessing to be in large quantities and therefore these goods had to be mixed with other such material. in view of these requirements appellants chose not to follow the provisions of section 173h which require identification of the goods which were returned for reprocessing. instead it declared in its 57g declaration resins in natural and colour as input for the manufacture of final product and accordingly they took credit of the duty paid on these goods when they were returned to customer. the department denied the modvat credit and passed the impugned order. the question is whether the action taken by the assessee is correct or not.3. i have heard mayur shroff for the appellant and shri patwari for the department. the identical question came up for consideration before the tribunal consisting of two members and the tribunal in its above mentioned order in the same assessee's case, allowed the appeal. hence the appeals are allowed with consequential relief and the early hearing application also stands disposed of.