TMI Blog2019 (2) TMI 552X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ompanies is not sustainable in law - appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant. - E/21084/2018-SM - Final Order No. 21970/2018 - Dated:- 31-12-2018 - MR. S.S GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER Mr. Raghavendra B Hanjer, Advocate For the Appellant Mrs. Kavitha Podwal, Superintendent (AR) For the Respondent ORDER Per: S.S GARG The present appeal is directed against the impugned order dated 18.1.2018 passed by the Commissioner (A) whereby the Commissioner (A) has rejected the appeal of the appellant. 2. Briefly the facts of the present case are that appellant is engaged in the manufacture and clearance of sugar and molasses on payment of Central Excise duty falling under Chapter 17 of the Schedule to the Central Exci ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... el for the appellant submitted that the impugned order is not sustainable in law as the same has been passed without properly appreciating the facts and the law. He further submitted that steam and electricity generated by using bagasse cannot be either as exempted product or as non-excisable product as the input used for generation of steam and electricity is bagasse which is an agricultural waste and no credit has been taken on the same. He also submitted that steam and electricity generated by using bagasse are not covered under CTH 28 or 27 as Chapter 28 and 27 covers the products manufactured out of mineral fuels and mineral oil as rightly held by the apex court in the case of Gularia Chini Mills vs. UOI: 2015 (34) STR 175 (SC). He ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f ₹ 33,858/- vide Challan No.00396 dated 29.11.2016 which has been accepted by the Jurisdictional Range Officer as per the verification report dated 28.11.2016. 5. On the other hand, the learned AR defended the impugned order and submitted that as per the decision of the Mumbai Tribunal in the case of Sharad S.S.K. Ltd. vs. CCE, Kolhapur: 2017 (49) STR 506 (Tri.-Mum.) wherein the Tribunal has held that the appellants are liable to reverse the credit, if any, taken on inputs/input services which have been used in the generation of electricity which have been sold to MSEB. 6. After considering the submissions of both the parties and perusal of the material on record, I find that the issue involved in the present appeals is no ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
