TMI Blog2012 (11) TMI 1032X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rightly held that there is no requirement of payment of 10% of the value of iron ore fine cleared by the appellant. No infirmity is found in the order passed by Commissioner (Appeals) - Following decision of Rallies India [2008 (12) TMI 46 - HIGH COURT BOMBAY] - Decided against Revenue. - E/3779/2010-SM - 1712/2012-SM(BR)(PB) - Dated:- 29-11-2012 - Ms. Archana Wadhwa, J. Shri B.B. Sharma, AR, for the Appellant. Shri S.P. Jha, Consultant, for the Respondent. ORDER Being aggrieved with the order passed by Commissioner (Appeals), Revenue has filed the present appeal. 2. I have heard Shri B.B. Sharma, learned AR appearing for the Revenue and Shri S.P. Ojha, learned Consultant appearing for the respondent assessee. 3. The ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... re also obtained, which they termed as Iron ore fines. These are not usable in the kiln for the purpose of recovery of sponge iron. It is still the same material as that of initial iron ore but of smaller size and not usable in the factory of the Appellant. Nevertheless what is obtained as iron ore fine are smaller pieces of iron ore. Therefore, the same is sold by the Appellant as waste, which are usable by others for recovery of iron. It therefore quite clear that the iron ore fines is not different from the present raw material in name, character and use except in smaller size and therefore it cannot be termed as a product which came into existence as a result of process of manufacture. Further the applicant have set up their unit for pr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r export by the appellant. Once it is established that the iron ore fines are not exempted excisable goods being manufactured by the appellant and it continues to be unusable segregated raw material. Therefore provisions of Rules 6(2) and 6(3)(b) of the Cenvat Credit Rules are not attracted and hence the impugned order-in-original passed by adjudicating authority is unsustainable and liable to be set aside. I hold accordingly. 6. I find that the issue is no more res integra and stand settled by various decisions of the Tribunal holding that the provision of Rule 6 are not applicable to the waste emerging during the course of final products. Reliance can also be placed upon the Hon ble Bombay High Court decision in Rallies India [2009 ( ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
