Home Case Index All Cases Central Excise Central Excise + AT Central Excise - 2006 (7) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2006 (7) TMI 411 - AT - Central ExciseExcise duty - Cenvat/Modvat - classifying the Corex Gas as “Carbon Monoxide (CO)” - mis-classified the gas under Chapter No. 2705.00 - Adjudication orders - whether Corex gas is an Off gas and an Off Gas can be treated as a by-product - HELD THAT:- The flow chart indicates that the inputs, raw materials, pellets, iron ore, oxygen, nitrogen etc. are fed in the Corex furnace. In the furnace, these items are all melted at a very high temperature and the liquid hot iron is made to pass through another set of steel mix. The liquid steel passes through slab making and the slabs are hot rolled into coils making and the final product Hot Rolled Coils comes into existence. In terms of the flow chart, it is seen that these gases arise when all the raw materials are put in the furnace and melted. Therefore, on a careful consideration of the flow chart, the plea raised by the assessees that the Corex Gas arises as a technological necessity is required to be accepted. The Ministry of Environment & Forests also has treated the Corex Gas as an ‘off gas’ and as an environmental hazard. The off gases have been treated as by-products in all the three cited judgments viz. (i) GAIL; (2) Hi-tech Carbon and (3) Phillips Carbon Black. Therefore, these three judgments would clearly apply to the facts of the case. Furthermore, we notice that in the appellants’ own case, this Bench, by Final order[2006 (6) TMI 308 - CESTAT, BANGALORE] has considered Non-granulated Slag arising during the course of manufacture of HR Coils as a by-product. The flow chart shows the emergence of slag at the same stage where Corex Gas has come into existence. Therefore, the analogy drawn by the learned Counsel that the Non-granulated Slag, which has been treated as a by-product should be applied to the Corex Gas arising in the same stage, is required to be accepted by following the ratio in the Final Order [2006 (6) TMI 308 - CESTAT, BANGALORE]. In sum, the ratio of the cited judgments would apply to the facts of the case. The plea of the learned JDR that investigation has led to a different conclusion is not the subject matter of these appeals. As there is no estoppel in statute, Revenue can continue with their investigation. At this stage, the learned Counsel refers to Shri Vallabh Glass Works Ltd. and Another v. UOI and Others[1984 (3) TMI 64 - SUPREME COURT] case, which refers to the law of estoppel. It is for the appellants to raise their objection before the pending proceedings. In so far as these proceedings are concerned, the issue is covered by the cited judgments. Therefore, the appeals are allowed with consequential relief, if any.
|