Contact us   Feedback   Annual Subscription   New User   Login      
Tax Management India .com
TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

2015 (10) TMI 1699 - CESTAT AHMEDABAD

2015 (10) TMI 1699 - CESTAT AHMEDABAD - TMI - CENVAT Credit - whether 5% amount under Rule 6 of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 is required to be paid by the appellant on Bagasse cleared by the appellant at Nil rate of duty when CENVAT credit is taken on the inputs - Held that:- It is observed from reply dated 28.06.2011, filed by the appellant to the show cause notice that sugarcane is pushed into a cane crushing Mill to get Bagasse waste and sugarcane raw juice. It has not been brought on record .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

assessee in the process of manufacturing soap uses acid slurry and in the process Spent sulphuric acid gets generated as a bye product. Though the products may be different, the ratio laid down by this Court would apply to the facts of the present case. We, therefore, do not think that the Tribunal committed any error in holding against the revenue. - The order passed by CESTAT Delhi, in the case of Indian Potash Limited vs. CCE (2012 (12) TMI 347 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI) is on the same issue - Dec .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ng authority has been upheld. The issue involved in this appeal is whether 5% amount under Rule 6 of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 is required to be paid by the appellant on Bagasse cleared by the appellant at Nil rate of duty when CENVAT credit is taken on the inputs. 2. Shri J.C. Patel, (Advocate) appearing on behalf of the appellant relied upon the following case laws to argue that no amount is required to be paid even after the amendment of Section 2(d) of the Central Excise Act, 1944 with e .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

AR) appearing on behalf of the Revenue defended the order passed by the first appellate authori8ty that after amendment of Section 2(d) with effect from 10.05.2008, Bagasse has to be treated as exempted goods and amount as per Rule 6(3) of the Cenvat Credit Rules,, 2004 has been correctly confirmed against the appellant. 4. Heard both sides and perused the case records. The issue involved in the present appeal is whether or not appellant is required to maintain separate record for inputs used in .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

on payment of duty. In the absence of any evidence on record, to show credit taken inputs used in the making of Bagasse, the ratio of High Court s order in the case of CCE, Ahmedabad-III vs. Nirma Limited (supra) will be applicable. Para 3 and 4 of this case law observed as follows:- 3. Counsel for the Revenue was confronted with the decision of this Court in Tax Appeal No. 1736 of 2009 wherein though the products under consideration were different, legal issue was similar. We find that a Divisi .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

uantity of inputs which is used in the manufacture of exempted goods. Sub- rule (2) imposes an obligation on the manufacturer who manufactures final products and exempted goods from the common input to maintain separate accounts for receipt, consumption and inventory of inputs. Examining the applicability of the aforesaid rules to the facts of the present case, as noted hereinabove, it is not as if more quantity of Hydrochloric Acid is used than that required for manufacturing Gelatin or that by .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

f Rule 6 of the Rules so as to call for maintaining separate accounts in respect of the same. When the entire quantity of input is used in the manufacture of Gelatin, the question of maintaining separate accounts or of paying a percentage of the total price of the exempted goods would not arise. In the peculiar facts of the present case, sub-rule (1) of rule 6, itself would not come into play inasmuch the manufacturer does not deliberately use any quantity of the inputs, viz. Hydrochloric Acid f .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

e would have no applicability to the facts of the present case inasmuch as in the facts of the said case, common input had been consciously used in the manufacture of two final products, whereas in the facts of the present case, the input Hydrochloric Acid is used for the manufacture of Gelatin alone, however during the course of manufacturing process a by-product viz. Mother liquor also emerges. 4. We are, of course, concerned with different products in the present case. The assessee in the pro .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 



|| Home || Acts and Rules || Notifications || Circulars || Schedules || Tariff || Forms || Case Laws || Manuals ||

|| About us || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members || Site Map ||

© Taxmanagementindia.com [A unit of MS Knowledge Processing Pvt. Ltd.] All rights reserved.

Go to Mobile Version