TMI Blog2017 (3) TMI 550X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ule 6(3) of CCR, 2002/2004. Held that: - appellants conduct clearly shows that it has distinguished the clearances to two different buyers. The first category of buyers are duty paying buyers and the second category buyers are notified end users. Therefore, there appears no prejudice caused by appellant to Revenue to be debarred from grant of the CENVAT credit to it nor the prescribed percentage of levy is imposable on it - spent sulphuric acid not being final product, the appellant cannot be denied of the CENVAT credit available to it on the input used to manufacture LABSA. Mere emergence of spent sulphuric acid does not debar the appellant to this benefit - appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant. - E/265 to 270/2008 - 40375-40 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... earned counsel further submitted that Apex Court in the case of Swadeshi Polytex Ltd. Vs. Collector 1989 (44) ELT 794 (SC) held that when emergence of by-product in the course of manufacture is beyond the control of the manufacturer, the appellant does not intend to manufacture the same. That does not debar him from the CENVAT credit of the input used in the manufacture of the dutiable principal goods nor should the appellant imposed any levy alleging use of common input in manufacture of such by-product. Para 25 of the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of Union of India Vs. Hindustan Zinc Ltd. reported in 2014 (303) ELT 321 (SC) recognized this principle. Added to this, the exempted goods not being meant for manufacture but is ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... #39;s conduct clearly shows that it has distinguished the clearances to two different buyers. The first category of buyers are duty paying buyers and the second category buyers are notified end users. Therefore, there appears no prejudice caused by appellant to Revenue to be debarred from grant of the CENVAT credit to it nor the prescribed percentage of levy is imposable on it. 8. The Hon ble High Court of Madras following the ratio laid down in the case of Hindustan Zinc Ltd. (supra), held in the appellants own case reported in 2015 (322) ELT 508 (Mad.) that spent sulphuric acid not being final product, the appellant cannot be denied of the CENVAT credit available to it on the input used to manufacture LABSA. Mere emergence of s ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
