CCE Vs. EXPLICIT TRADING AND MARKETING

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an appeal filed by the Revenue against Order -in -Appeal No. 227/2003 dated 30.6.2003 by which the Commissioner (Appeals) has allowed Modvat Credit to the Respondents M/s. Explicit Trading and Marketing (P) Ltd.

(2.) When the matter was called noone was present on behalf of the Respondent. Shri Balbir Singh, Learned Advocate, by his letter dated 9.3.2004 has requested for adjournment which is not acceded to in view of the submissions made by the learned SDR that the issue involved has been decided by the decision of the Appellate Tribunal in the case of Albert David Ltd. Vs. CCE, Meerut,2003 (151) ELT 443 (Tri -Del.) which has been affirmed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court as the Civil Appeal of M/s. Albert David Ltd. has been dismissed as reported in 2003 (157) ELT A81.

(3.) Shri O.P. Arora, learned SDR, submitted that the Respondent manufactures Fruit/Juice based brinks and mineral water; that their products were exempted from payment of duty w.e.f. 1.3.2001 under Notification No. 3/2001 -CE dated 1.3.2001; that the Dy. Commissioner under Order -in -Original No. 13/2001 has confirmed the demand and imposed a penalty of equivalent amount in respect of CENVAT Credit taken by them on inputs used in the manufacture of finished goods which were lying in stock as on 1.3.2001 as well as the stock of inputs as on 1.3.2001; that the Commissioner (Appeals), under the impugned Order, has set aside the Adjudication Order following the decision of the Larger Bench of the Tribunal in the case of CCE, Rajkot Vs. Ashok Iron and Steel Fabricators, 2002 (140) ELT 227 (T -LB). He, further, submitted that as per Rule 57AB of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 CENVAT Credit cannot be allowed in respect of inputs which is used in or in relation to the manufacture of exempted goods; that the goods manufactured by the Respondents were exempted completely from the payment of duty w.e.f. 1.3.2001, the credit is not admissible to them and is recoverable under Rule 57AH. he relied upon the decision in the case of Super Cassettes Industries Ltd. Vs. UOI, 1997 (94) ELT 302 (Allahabad) and the decision of the Larger Bench in the case of Raghuvir (India) Ltd. Vs. CCE, Delhi, 2002 (140) ELT 280.