2018 (4) TMI 1447 – CESTAT NEW DELHI – TMI – Manufacture – processing of iron ore – Revenue held a view that such conversion of iron ore into concentrates will amount to manufacture and liable to central excise duty – Held that: – the identical issue has come up before the Tribunal in the case of M/s. Jains Mines and Minerals (India) Ltd. vs. CCE & ST, Jabalpur [2017 (10) TMI 1283 – CESTAT, Delhi], where it was held that There is no special process facility with the appellant. Improvement in the content of “Fe” due to the processes undertaken by the appellant by itself will not make the resultant product as iron ore concentrate – the process do not amount to manufacture – appeal allowed – decided in favor of appellant. – Excise Appeal No.
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
n ore into concentrates will amount to manufacture and liable to central excise duty. So the demand of duty was raised along with penalty. Being aggrieved, the appellant has filed a present appeal. 3. With this background, we heard Shri Z U Alvi and Shri S K Bansal, learned representatives of the parties and gone through the material available on record. 4. After hearing both the sides and on perusal of the material available on record, it appears that the identical issue has come up before the Tribunal in the case of M/s. Jains Mines and Minerals (India) Ltd. vs. CCE & ST, Jabalpur [Final Order No. 57214/2017 dated 10.10.2017 ] where it was observed that- 4. We have heard both the sides and perused the appeal record. The only dispute i
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
India – 2003 (154) E.L.T. 65 (T) affirmed by Apex Court – 2012 (283) E.L.T. A112 (S.C.) (c) Indian Rare Earth Ltd. – 2002 (139) E.L.T. 352 (T) affirmed by Apex Court – 2009 (241) E.L.T. A70 (S.C.); and (d) Super Engineering – 1996 (82) E.L.T. 539 (T). 5. It is clear that process undertaken by the appellant do not amount to manufacture of new product as understood in the industry. Accordingly, we find the impugned order is without merit and the same is set aside. The appeal is allowed. 5. In view of the above, following our earlier order (supra), we set aside the impugned order and allow the appeal with consequential relief. (Dictated and pronounced in the open Court) – Case laws – Decisions – Judgements – Orders – Tax Management India –
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =