NARHARI ENGINEERING Vs. COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE,

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These applications relate to two appeals both arising out of the same order of the commissioner (Appeals). These are therefore disposed of by this common order.

(2.) On hearing both the sides on the applications I find that the issue can be finally decided. The appeals are therefore taken up for disposal on granting waiver of predeposit of penalty.

(3.) The appellants were operating under the Modvat scheme. They went out of the scheme and took benefit of alternate scheme. Later once again, they came back to the modvat scheme. On return they did not file any declaration under Rule 57G of the Central Excise Rules. The assistant commissioner disallowed the Modvat Credit on the ground that no declaration had been filed. He did this in the face of the 2 orders of the CEGAT in the case of Sure Safe Glass Works Pvt. Ltd. [1996 (83) ELT 328] and in the case of Wox Coolers Pvt. Ltd. [1993 (63) ELT 637.] The Commissioner Appeals upheld the orders citing tribunal decision. In the case of M/s. Signs India v. CCE Madras [1996 (82) ELT 65], hence the appeals.