M/S. Dancap Electronics and Others Vs. C.C.E. B'Lore I And Others

M/S. Dancap Electronics and Others vs C.C.E. B'Lore I And Others

Type Court Judgment Court Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Decided Mar 08, 2001

~2 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/21317

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

Citation: sooperkanoon.com/21317
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT
Decided On: Mar 08, 2001
Subject: Service Tax

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Service Tax

Key legal issue: Service Tax

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

M/S. Dancap Electronics and Others

Advocate Shri. Shiva Kumar

Respondent

C.C.E. B'Lore I And Others

Legal References

Reported In: (2001)(132)ELT202Tri(Bang.)

Excerpt

1. these are 31 appeals. all these appeals relate to modvat credit.issue with reference to maintainability of the appeal in respect of modvat credit has already been considered by us as per our earlier order no. s/155-177/2001 as well as final order no 249-299/2001 dated 27.2.2001 in the case of m/s wipro ltd and others. most of the advocates/reps appearing for the respective parties submitted that they have nothing to add further in view of the aforesaid decision. few of them requested for an adjournment in view of the proposal made in the finance bill 2001. their request is not acceeded to and accordingly request for an adjournment has been rejected. shri shiva kumar appearing for the appellants in appeal no. e/2918/98 submitted that other modvat rules were substituted by cenvat rules and as such old modvat rules were not omitted. this point has also been dealt with in our earlier order. in our order, it was clearly held that in the absence of the saving clause all the proceedings initiated under the old repealed rules would simply lapse and accordingly appeals are not maintainable following the ratio of the decision of the supreme court in the case of kholapur cane sugar works vs union of india reported in 2000 (119 (elt)/257(sc). following our earlier decision, all these appeals are dismissed as not maintainable.

Full Judgment

1. These are 31 appeals. All these appeals relate to MODVAT credit.

Issue with reference to maintainability of the appeal in respect of MODVAT credit has already been considered by us as per our earlier Order No. S/155-177/2001 as well as Final Order No 249-299/2001 dated 27.2.2001 in the case of M/s Wipro Ltd and others. Most of the advocates/reps appearing for the respective parties submitted that they have nothing to add further in view of the aforesaid decision. Few of them requested for an adjournment in view of the proposal made in the Finance Bill 2001. Their request is not acceeded to and accordingly request for an adjournment has been rejected. Shri Shiva Kumar appearing for the appellants in Appeal No. E/2918/98 submitted that other modvat rules were substituted by CENVAT Rules and as such old Modvat Rules were not omitted. This point has also been dealt with in our earlier Order. In our Order, it was clearly held that in the absence of the saving clause all the proceedings initiated under the old repealed rules would simply lapse and accordingly appeals are not maintainable following the ratio of the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of Kholapur Cane Sugar Works Vs Union of India reported in 2000 (119 (ELT)/257(SC). Following our earlier decision, all these appeals are dismissed as not maintainable.

Same Court & Year Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT · 2001 Same Parties M/S. Dancap Electronics and Others vs C.C.E. B'Lore I And Others Same Subject Service Tax