Home Case Index All Cases Central Excise Central Excise + AT Central Excise - 2024 (1) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2024 (1) TMI 821 - AT - Central ExciseCENVAT Credit - clearance of exempted goods - bagasse and press mud - separate accounts and inventories have not been maintained as required in terms of the provisions of Sub-Rule 3 of Rule 6 of CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004 - Rule 6 of CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004 read with Section 11AC of the Central Excise Act, 1944 - period from April 2016 to June 2017 - HELD THAT:- The issue is no more res-integra. Revenue’s only grievance is that the precedent decision followed by the learned Commissioner (Appeals) would not apply to the present case of the respondent as Rule 6 of the CENVAT Credit Rules was amended subsequent to the judgement of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in UNION OF INDIA VERSUS DSCL SUGAR LTD. [2015 (10) TMI 566 - SUPREME COURT]. It is the case of the Revenue that consequent to such amendment in Rule 6 of the CENVAT Credit Rules non-excisable goods cleared for a consideration from a factory are to be treated as exempted goods for the purpose of Rule 6 of the CENVAT Credit Rules for clearances w.e.f. 01.03.2015. The grounds of the Revenue was dealt with by the Tribunal in the case of COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE & SERVICE TAX, MEERUT-I VERSUS M/S. BAJAJ HINDUSTHAN SUGAR LTD. [2018 (12) TMI 1649 - CESTAT ALLAHABAD] wherein it was observed that It was held in the said Final Order that Press Mud and Bagasse are not arising out of manufacturing activity and the same are agricultural waste and residue and therefore since the said Final Order is applicable in the present case I uphold the impugned order and reject the appeal filed by Revenue. There are no justifiable reasons to interfere in the impugned order passed by the learned Commissioner (Appeals) - appeal of revenue dismissed.
|