COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE Vs. JAYSHREE INSULATORS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The questions raised : In this application under Section 35G(3) of the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944 before it was amended in 1999, two points have been raised namely :

(2.) Learned Counsel for the applicant points out that these are questions of law in respect of which there was no decision by the High Court though there are decisions of the Larger Bench of the Tribunal. Therefore, it raises substantial questions of law to be stated before the High Court.

(3.) Mr. J.P. Khaitan, learned Counsel for the respondent, on the other hand, takes a preliminary objection relying on the decision in Commissioner of Income-Tax, Bombay v. Scindia Steam Navigation Co. Ltd. - (1961) 42 ITR 589 on two propositions. First, that these points were never raised before the learned Tribunal nor the learned Tribunal had dealt with the same and that one of the points is based on the subsequent amendment. Second, he points out from the questions sought to be referred to that it was never asserted by the appellant that these were not inputs but were treated to be part of the apparatus or equipments, which they are now seeking to bring within the exclusion clause to exclude the same from the Modvat benefit allowed to the respondents by the learned Tribunal. Mr. Khaitan has led us through the decision of the learned Tribunal.