9911796707
TMI Blog2009 (4) TMI 395X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... oduced into Sulphur recovery unit for recovery of Sulphur. On going through the write up on process of recovery of Sulphur filed by M/s. MRPL, it is seen that the process, gas flow leaving the Sulphur condenser still contains high percentage of H2S and SO2. In order to convert this into sulphur, the gas is then conducted through two consequent Claus Sulphur converters. Prior to process gas flow entering the Claus converter the same is heated to optimum temperature for Catalytic conversion by re-heaters fed with high pressure steam and the recovery process if carried on further. M/s. MRPL are using inputs on which they have availed CENVAT Credit like catalysts, Nitrogen & caustic solution in the manufacture of sulphur. Also M/s. MRPL are usi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . If the manufacturer or the provider of out put service, opting not to maintain separate account, then if the exempted goods are other than goods mentioned at sub-rule 6(3)(a) of the said Rules, then the manufacturer, as per sub-rule 6(3)(b) of the id Rules, shall pay an amount equal to 10% of the price, excluding sales tax and other taxes, if any payable on such goods, of the exempted final products charged, by the manufacturer for the sale of such goods at the time of their clearance from the factory. Hence, it appeared that a manufacturer opting not to maintain separate account for the inputs used for dutiable as well as exempted final product products, then they have to pay 10% of the price, excluding sales tax etc., on the value at wh ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... order, appellants are before us. 3. The ld. Counsel appearing for the appellant, at the outset submits that an identical issue of the appellant for an earlier period was agitated in appeal No. E/583/2005 and the said appeal was decide by this Bench in Final Order No. 1392/6 dated 22-8-2006 and allowed the appeal in favour of the appellant. It is his submission that the issue is now squarely settled, in favour of the appellant by the various pronoun cements as under:- (1) IOC Ltd. v. CCE, Lucknow [2003(108) ECR 578] (2) CCE, Meerut v. Shakumbari Sugar & Allied Inds. Ltd., [2004 (176) E.L.T. 819] (3) Batyakala Agro Oil Products Ltd. v. CCE, Guntur,' [2007 (214) E.L.T. 127] (4) CCE, Madurui v. Sterlite Inds. Ltd. [2007 (217) E.L.T. 443]. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sent case. Therefore, in terms of the IOC's order the question of reversing the credit of 8% does not arise. The same finding has been recorded in the case of JSW Steel Ltd. & Anr. by this Bench. Both these rulings clearly apply to the facts of the case. The ld. Counsel at this stage, submits that there are certain issues which are contentious and they may be kept open to enable then to contest in subsequent proceedings. The prayer of the counsel is accepted. The impugned order is set aside by respectfully following the ratio of the noted, judgments. The appeal is allowed. " 7. We find from the above reproduced ratio that we have clearly held that there is no question of reversing 10% of the amount of the value of the Sulphur cleared from ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
