ORDER
S.S. Kang, Member (J)
1. Heard both the sides.
2. The Revenue filed this appeal against the Order-in-Appeal passed by the Commissioner (Appeals) whereby the Commissioner (Appeals) allowed the benefit of Cenvat credit in respect of kraft paper and nickel catalyst on the ground that these are used in the manufacture of intermediate goods which are further used in the manufacture of final products which are cleared on payment of duty.
3. The contention of the Revenue is that the intermediate products are exempted from payment of duty, therefore, the credit in respect of inputs used in the intermediate products is not admissible. The contention of the Revenue is also that the decision of the Larger Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Ballarpur Industries v. CCE which is relied upon by the Commissioner (Appeals) is not accepted by the accepted by the Revenue and appeal has been filed before Hon’ble Supreme Court.
4. It is not disputed by the Revenue that the intermediate products, in which the inputs are used are further used in the manufacture of final products which are cleared on payment of duty. This issue is already settled by the Hon’ble High Court in the case of Ponds (India) Ltd. v. CCE and the decision of the Larger Bench in the case of Ballarpur Industries Limited (supra) where the Hon’ble High Court held that the inputs credit is admissible for the material which is used in the manufacture of intermediate product i.e. container though exempted, in which the final product is packed and cleared on payment of duty. In view of the above decision of the Hon’ble Madras High Court and the decision of the Larger bench of the Tribunal, the appeal is dismissed.
[The operative part or the order is pronounced in the open court on 23.10.2003]