2019 (2) TMI 379 – CESTAT MUMBAI – TMI – Clearance of by-product Bagasse – exempt goods – credit not reversed – Rule 6(3)(i) of the CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004 – Held that:- The issue of applicability of Rule 6(1) of CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004 to bagasse which emerges during the course of manufacture of sugar and molasses, has been settled taking note of the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Union of India Vs. DSCL Sugar Ltd. [2015 (10) TMI 566 – SUPREME COURT], where it was held that Since it is not a manufacture, obviously Rule 6 of the Cenvat Rules, 2004, shall have no application – demand set aside – appeal allowed – decided in favor of appellant. – Appeal No. E/88189/2018, E/88779/2018 – A/85009-85010/2019 – Dated:- 3-1-2019 – DR. D.M. MISRA, MEMBER (JUDICIAL) Shri V.B. Gaikwad, Advocate for Appellant Shri N.N. Prabhudesai, Supdt. (AR) for Respondent ORDER Per: Dr. D.M. Misra These two appeals are filed, one by the assessee appellant and other by the Revenue challengi
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
its that whether Rule 6 is applicable to bagasse emerging as byproduct during the course of manufacture of sugar and molasses, has now been settled in their favour in their own case reported as Athani Sugars Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise – 2017-TIOL-4280-CESTAT-MUM and also in other case Shree Narmada Khand Udyog Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise – 2018 (8) TMI 1075-CESTAT-AHMD and Pannageshwar Sugar Mills Ltd. vs. Commissioner of Central Excise – 2018 (10) TMI 966-CESTAT-MUM. Therefore, the impugned order is bad in law and not sustainable. 4. Learned AR for the Revenue reiterates the findings of the learned Commissioner (Appeals). 5. Heard both sides and perused the records. 6. I find that the issue of applicability of Rule 6(1) of CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004 to bagasse which emerges during the course of manufacture of sugar and molasses, has been settled taking note of the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Union of India Vs. DSCL Sugar Ltd. – 2015 (322) EL
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
exempted goods , final products defined under the Cenvat credit Rules, 2004 in clause (d) and clause (h), respectively include non-excisable goods, which is cleared for consideration from factory, hence Rule 6(1) is applicable to the by-product bagasse. Clause (d) and (h) of the said Rule reads as follows:- (d) exempted goods means excisable goods which are exempt from the whole of the duty of excise leviable thereon, and includes goods which are chargeable to Nil rate of duty; (h) final products means excisable goods manufactured or produced from input, or using input service; 6. The amended definition of 'excisable goods' and 'manufacture', have been considered by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in DSCL Sugar Ltd's case (supra). Their Lordships observed as follows:- 10. In the present case it could not be pointed out as to whether any process in respect of Bagasse has been specified either in the Section or in the Chapter notice. In the absence thereof this deeming
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =