Home Case Index All Cases Central Excise Central Excise + AT Central Excise - 2017 (3) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2017 (3) TMI 550 - AT - Central ExciseApplicability of Rule 6(3) of CCR, 2002/2004 - a byproduct called spent sulphuric acid emerging in the manufacturing process of LABSA - Such bye product whenever sold without end-use necessity of the law, duty was realized and that was paid to the treasury. Whenever this spent sulphuric acid is cleared with end-use requirement of N/N. 6/2002-CE dated 1.3.2002 for use thereof in manufacture of fertilizer, there was no duty realization made since such clearance is exempt as per the notification - appellant claims that clearances made to notified end user under specific notification being exempt, the case of the appellant is beyond the purview of Rule 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.
|