ORDER
Shri S.L. Peeran
1. Both these appeals raises a common question of law and facts and hence they are taken up together for disposal, as per law. None have appeared for the appellants despite notices issued in these cases.
2. Ld. D.R. Shri S. Kanan points out that the appellants are not entitled to the benefit of Modvat credit on HSD Oil in view of the provisions of Finance Act 2000. He submits this has been applied by Larger Bench in the case of Cheimo Pulp Tissues and Ors. Vs. CCE as reported in 2000 (38) RLT 988-LB. He submits that all such appeals have been dismissed by denying Modvat credit on HSD oil.
3. On a careful consideration, I notice that the issue is covered by the Finance Act 2000 and the said provisions contained in the Finance Act have been applied by Larger Bench in the case of Cheimo Pulp Tissues (supra). Now it is well settled that the provision of Finance Act 2000 has been applied retrospectively and as a consequence, the rejection of Modvat credit on HSD Oil by the lower authorities is totally justified, in terms of law passed by the Finance Act 2000 and the Larger Bench judgment cited above. Hence, there is no merit in both the appeals and the same are dismissed.
(Pronounced & dictated in open Court)