TMI Blog2018 (12) TMI 780X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Commissioner has erred in finding that the appellants are not eligible for the N/N. 89/95 because they are manufacturing tins as submitted by the learned counsel for the appellants. The learned Commissioner has not appreciated the fact that the tins manufactured are also eligible for exemption under N/N. 10/96 as submitted by the appellant. The decision in the case of M/S RICELA HEALTH FOODS LTD., M/S J.V.L. AGRO INDUSTRIAL LTD., M/S KISSAN FATS LIMITED VERSUS CCE, CHANDIGARH, ALLAHABAD [2018 (2) TMI 1395 - CESTAT NEW DELHI] squarely applies to the facts of the present case, where it was held that the excisability of the product itself is seriously in dispute as per the opinion expressed by us, as above, these cannot be considered as an ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... other excisable goods, they are not eligible for exemption under Notification No. 89/1995 dated 18.05.1995. The Commissioner has confirmed the demand of ₹ 1,19,12,862/- and imposed equal penalty under Section 11AC. The period involved in the demand was from April 2011 to September 2013. Hence this appeal. 3. The learned counsel for the appellants has submitted that the issue is no longer res integra in view of the decision of Larger Bench of Hon ble Tribunal in Ricela Health Foods Ltd. Vs. CCE, Chandigarh, Allahabad 2018 (361) ELT 1049 (Tri. LB) wherein the Hon ble Tribunal has applied the ratio of the Hon ble Supreme Court judgment in the case of Commr. Vs. Indian Aluminium Co. Ltd 2006 (203) ELT 3 (SC) and held that t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rned AR has reiterated the findings of OIO and OIA. 5. Heard both sides and perused the records of the case. 6. We find that the appellants are engaged in the manufacture of vegetable oils and the by-products that are incidental to the manufacture and are nothing but waste arising during the course of refining of the oil, the appellants can be held to be manufacturers of such waste products arising during the course of manufacture. We find that the Commissioner has erred in finding that the appellants are not eligible for the Notification No. 89/95 because they are manufacturing tins as submitted by the learned counsel for the appellants. The learned Commissioner has not appreciated the fact that the tins manufactured are also eligibl ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s the products under consideration are clearly not in the nature of by-products emerging during the course of manufacture. The process of manufacturing refined vegetable oil is essentially by removing the unwanted materials that were present in the crude vegetable oil so that a refined vegetable oil can be obtained. In this process of refining, the unwanted materials are removed. Hence, we are of the considered view that the removal of unwanted materials resulting in products like gums, waxes and fatty acid with odour cannot be called as a process of manufacture of these gums, waxes and fatty acid with odour. The process of manufacture is for refined rice bran oil. As such, we note that these incidental products are nothing but waste during ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
