Cce, New Delhi Vs. M/S. Anu Auto Industries - Court Judgment

Excerpt:
1. in this application, the department claims that a question of law as framed in this application has arisen our of final order no.a/351/97-nb(sm) dated 12.05.1997 passed by this tribunal in appeal no.e/2094/94-nb.2. today there is no representation for the respondents in spite of notice. the applicants are represented by ld. jdr shri swatantra kumar.3. the question formulated for reference to high court, as stated in annexure 'b' to this application, is as under: "2. whether provisions of rule 57c are attracted in cases where final product are cleared without availing of exemption from whole of duty of excise." 4. the respondents were an ssi unit, operating under notification no.1/93-ce dated 28.02.1993. during the period 01.04.1993 to 31.08.1993, they paid duty of excise on final product, on their own volition, availing modvat credit on inputs used in the manufacture of the final product. the credit so taken was disallowed by the departmental authorities, against which the assessees approached this tribunal in the aforesaid appeal. this tribunal allowed the appeal, following the earlier decision in garg industries vs cce [1996 (15) rlt 329]. the order in the assessee's appeal was passed by the tribunal after hearing both sides. the order does not contain anything to indicate that any argument based on the provisions of rule 57c was pressed before the bench on behalf of the department. there was not even any argument by the dr before the bench that the decision of the tribunal in the case of garg industries (supra) was not applicable to the facts of the case. the question of law formulated in the present application is entirely based on the provisions of rule 57 c. neither in the arguments of the revenue before the bench nor in the tribunal's findings in garg industries (supra) relied on the bench was there any reference to rule 57c.5. in view of the above position, i do not find that any question of law as formulated by the revenue in the present application arises out of the final order of the bench in the above appeal. i, therefore, reject this application.

Judgment:
1. In this application, the Department claims that a question of law as framed in this application has arisen our of Final Order No.A/351/97-NB(SM) dated 12.05.1997 passed by this Tribunal in Appeal No.E/2094/94-NB.2. Today there is no representation for the respondents in spite of notice. The applicants are represented by ld. JDR Shri Swatantra Kumar.

3. The question formulated for reference to High Court, as stated in Annexure 'B' to this application, is as under: "2. Whether provisions of Rule 57C are attracted in cases where final product are cleared without availing of exemption from whole of duty of excise." 4. The respondents were an SSI unit, operating under Notification No.1/93-CE dated 28.02.1993. During the period 01.04.1993 to 31.08.1993, they paid duty of Excise on final product, on their own volition, availing Modvat credit on inputs used in the manufacture of the final product. The credit so taken was disallowed by the Departmental authorities, against which the assessees approached this Tribunal in the aforesaid appeal. This Tribunal allowed the appeal, following the earlier decision in Garg Industries Vs CCE [1996 (15) RLT 329]. The order in the assessee's appeal was passed by the Tribunal after hearing both sides. The order does not contain anything to indicate that any argument based on the provisions of Rule 57C was pressed before the Bench on behalf of the Department. There was not even any argument by the DR before the Bench that the decision of the Tribunal in the case of Garg Industries (supra) was not applicable to the facts of the case. The question of law formulated in the present application is entirely based on the provisions of Rule 57 C. Neither in the arguments of the Revenue before the Bench nor in the Tribunal's findings in Garg Industries (supra) relied on the Bench was there any reference to Rule 57C.5. In view of the above position, I do not find that any question of law as formulated by the Revenue in the present application arises out of the Final Order of the Bench in the above appeal. I, therefore, reject this application.