TMI Blog2017 (1) TMI 604X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 5895-55898/2016 - Dated:- 19-12-2016 - Mr. Dr. Satish Chandra, President And Mr. Ashok K. Arya, Member (Technical) Sh. V.K. Puri, Ld. Advocate for the appellant Sh. R. K. Manjhi, Ld. AR for the respondent ORDER Per Ashok K. Arya 1. The appellant, Jai Balaji Industries Ltd. has filed these four appeals against common order in appeal dated 03.12.2012 passed by Commissioner (Appeals-1) , Raipur (C.G.) whereunder the exemption benefit under Notification No. 67/95 CE 06.03.1995 has been denied on the item Dolochar captively consumed by the appellant for production of electricity. 2. The appellant has been represented by the Ld. Advocate, Sh.V.K Puri and Revenue has been represented Ld. AR, Sh. R.K. Manjhi. 3. The l ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d by the Tribunal in their own case (the appellant were earlier known as M/s HEG Ltd.) vide Final Order Nos. 307-310/2004-NB(C), dated 10.04.2004, which has been referred to in HEG Ltd. vs. CCE, Raipur [2013 (290) ELT 676 (Tri.-Del)]. If goods are not manufactured, no duty of excise is leviable thereon. Further, if no duty of excise is leviable on Char/Dolochar, these cannot be exempted under section 5A of the Central Excise Act, 1944 as only those goods can be exempted which are chargeable to duty of excise. No duty of excise is payable on Char/Dolochar. ii. If Char/Dolochar are not manufactured goods, the change from 10.05.2008 in the amended definition of excisable goods(given below) would still not render the goods as being subject ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... same cannot be held to be a manufactured product. 3. Though we note that inclusion of the said product under the tariff is subsequent to the decision to the above decision of the Tribunal in the same appellants case, but keeping in view the findings arrived at by the Tribunal that dolochar cannot be held to be a manufactured item, by following the earlier decision of the Supreme Court in the case of Ahmedabad Electricity Company Ltd. [2003 (158) ELT 3 (S.C.)], we hold that the appellant has been able to make out a prima facie case in its favour as it is well settled that the entry of particular product in the tariff by itself would not satisfy the definition of manufactureas appearing in Section 2(f) of the Central Excise Act. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
