I.J. Rao, Member (T)

1. The question that arises in this appeal is whether, for the purpose of Notifications 95/79-C.E. and No. 201/79-C.E. there should be a direct nexus between inputs and final products. This question arose because the appellants filed classification lists (Nos. 29,30,31 32) claiming proforma credit/set off of duty, in terms of Notification No. 95/79-C.E. as amended by Notification No. 58/82-C.E. as well as under Notification No. 201/79-C.E. as amended in respect of tyres manufactured and cleared by them as O.E. tyres cleared under bond under Chapter X procedure. A notice was issued to the appellants proposing the denial of their claim for set off proforma credit under Notifications Nos. 95/79 201/79-C.E. in respect of inputs used by them in the manufacture of those tyres which were cleared without payment of duty under bond for home consumption. The Asstt. Collector after hearing the appellants extended the benefit. The Department went in appeal against the Asstt. Collector's order dated 22.6.83. The Collector allowed the appeal. As a result the Appellants approached the Tribunal through this appeal.

2. Shri Harish Salve, the Ld. Counsel for the appellant