TMI Blog2018 (2) TMI 71X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... engaged in processing of imported raw sugar into white sugar on job work basis for M/s. Thiru Arooran Sugars Ltd., with whom they have entered into a contract. During the process of conversion of raw sugar into white sugar, molasses emerge. The appellant was clearing the white sugar on payment of duty. Similarly, prior to the period in present appeal, the molasses were being cleared by them on payment of duty to their own distilleries for further conversion into rectified spirit. 2. However, during the period in question, as a common registration was procured by them for their Unit and the Distillery Unit, the appellant started using the molasses captively for further conversion into spirit under the claim of captive consumption Notific ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed 20.11.2008 has held as under:- 3. we find that there is no dispute about the factual position. Notification No.67/95-CE, dated 16.03.1995, which exempts all the products captively consumed for further manufacture of the excisable goods, stands denied to the appellant on the sole ground that they were not the owner of the molasses in question and as they were doing job work for their principal manufacturer, the molasses emerged during the conversion of raw material into while sugar, belonged to the principal manufacturer, in which case the benefit of the exemption notification cannot be extended to them. 4. We note that the appellant, during the course of hearing before Commissioner (Appeals) relied very heavily upon the Tri ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ification No.67/95-CE, nowhere lays down the condition of ownership of the goods used captively. In the absence of the same in the notification, it is not permissible to the Revenue to introduce the said condition in the notification and to deny the benefit on the said ground. As such, we are of the view that the order of the lower authorities is not sustainable on merits. 6. Apart from the above, we also agree with the learned advocate that the demand having been raised, beyond the normal period of limitation is barred by limitation, inasmuch as, the Revenue has not been able to establish any suppression, mis-statement etc., on the part of the assessee, with a malafide intention to evade payment of duty . 7. Following the above de ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
