Home Case Index All Cases Central Excise Central Excise + AT Central Excise - 2019 (11) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2019 (11) TMI 433 - CESTAT BANGALOREClassification of goods - Electrical Energy - whether classified under Tariff Item No.27160000 of Central Excise Tariff Act (CETA), 1985 or otherwise? - captive consumption - excess/surplus quantity is sold to outside to power distribution companies for a consideration without payment of duty as no rate of duty has been prescribed in the CETA, 1985. HELD THAT:- The issue involved in the present appeal is no more res integra and has been settled by the decision of the Allahabad High Court in the case of GULARIA CHINI MILLS AND OTHERS VERSUS UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS [2013 (7) TMI 159 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT] which has been approved by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of UNION OF INDIA VERSUS DSCL SUGAR LTD. [2015 (10) TMI 566 - SUPREME COURT]. Further, the Division Bench of the Tribunal in the case of JAKARYA SUGARS LTD. VERSUS COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE, PUNE-II [2018 (5) TMI 1665 - CESTAT MUMBAI] has also considered the same issue and after relying upon the judgment of the Allahabad High Court in the case of Gularia Chini Mills has held that in the generation of electricity from bagasse, no other input or input service is used and therefore, the electrical energy is neither excisable under Section 2(d) of Central Excise Act, 1944 nor exempted goods and hence, Rule 6 is not applicable. The demand of 6% of the value of electricity sold to various companies is not sustainable in law - Appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant.
|