2017 (6) TMI 970

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... n Joint Commissioner (AR), for Respondent ORDER The present appeal is directed against Order-in-Original No. 46-Commr./LKO/CX/2010 dated 28/12/2010 passed by Commissioner of Central Excise, Lucknow. 2. It appeared to Revenue that the appellants were manufacturing Bagasse and said Bagasse was being further utilized in generation of electricity within the factory. It appeared to revenue that Baga .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... t the Show Cause Notice was adjudicated through said Order-in-Original No. 46-Commr./LKO/CX/2010 dated 28/12/2010, wherein the Original Authority confirmed the demand and imposed equal penalty. Aggrieved by the said Order-in-Original dated 28/12/2010 appellant has filed this appeal before this Tribunal. 3. Heard the Id. Counsel for the appellant. She has submitted that Hon'ble Supreme Court o .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... case of Union of India Versus DSCL Sugar Ltd. (supra). We find that Hon'ble Supreme Court of India have ruled that Bagasse is only an agriculture waste and residue and also that Bagasse is not covered in the definition of manufacture. We, therefore, hold that provisions of Rule 6(3)(a) of Cenvat Credit Rules 2002/2004 do not apply on the removal of Bagasse or utilization of Bagasse. We, theref .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X