Home Case Index All Cases Central Excise Central Excise + AT Central Excise - 2007 (9) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2007 (9) TMI 343 - AT - Central ExciseWhether the decision, in Rallis India Ltd. v. CCE, Salem, can be followed as binding precedent - Whether Rule 57CC is applicable to a manufacturer of excisable final product and excisable by-product - one dutiable and the other exempted - where both are manufactured intendedly and common inputs are used in or in relation to the manufacture of both the goods?” - Obviously, the copper contained in the ore viz. copper-iron sulphide has emerged as the final product viz. copper anodes, while sulphur which was present in chemical combination with the metals in the ore has been converted ultimately into its oxyacid viz. sulphuric acid (H2SO4). Hence it cannot be gainsaid that copper concentrate is common input for copper anodes and H2SO4. - we are of the view that it should be dealt with by the regular Bench as and when the Hon’ble High Court’s decision in the department’s appeal against the Tribunal’s final order in the assessees earlier case becomes available. - Thus, while the input (hydrochloric acid) considered in Rallis India case was not a common input for the dutiable final product and the exempted by-products, the copper concentrate in the present case is a common input for the dutiable final product and the exempted by-product. The two cases are clearly distinguishable on facts. Therefore, we hold that the decision of the Larger Bench in Rallis India case cannot be considered to be a precedent for the present case.
|