Rng IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION CENTRAL EXCISE APPEAL NO.45 OF 2009 Commissioner of Central Excise, Raigad ... Appellant vs M/s Pushpaman Forgings .. Respondents Mr.A.S.Rao with Ms Rutuja Ambekar for Appellant Mr.Prakash Shah with Mr Jas Sanghvi i,bPDS Legal for Respondents Coram: F.I.Rebello and J.H.Bhatia, JJ Dated: 24th June, 2009 P.C. 1. The period involved is between April 2000 to September 2004. Rule 6 2) of the CENVAT Credit Rules as it requires a manufacturer availing CENVAT credit in respect any inputs except inputs intended to be used as fuel to maintain books if the manufacturer manufactures exempted and dutiable goods. Sub rule (3) of Rule 6 provided those not opting to maintain separate accounts shall follow either of the methods set out therein. In other words, it is clear that once books have not to be maintained under sub rule (2) the question of opting method (2) would not arise. A similar view was also taken by the Gujarat High Court in Commissioner of Customs Vs Gujarat Narmada Fertilizers Co.Ltd 2006 (193) ELT 136 (Guj). 2. In our opinion, considering a plain meaning of Rule 6 (2) question of law as framed wold not arise and conseque4ntly appeal dismissed. { J.H.Bhatia, J } { F. I. Rebello, J }