TMI Blog2019 (3) TMI 29X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... - E/21050/2018-SM - Final Order No. 20206/2019 - Dated:- 25-2-2019 - MR. S.S GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER Mrs. Sandhya Sarvode, Advocate For the Appellant Mr. K. Murali, Superintendent, AR For the Respondent ORDER Per: S.S GARG The present appeal is directed against the impugned order dated 26.03.2018 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 the appellants are engaged in the manufacture of Iron and Steel products falling under Chapter 72 of the CETA, 1985 as well as Iron Pellets falling under Chapter 26 of the CETA, 1985. During the course of manufacture of the dutiable final products, by-products such a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 303) ELT 321 (SC). 4.1. She further submitted that the respondent has placed reliance on Explanation to Section 2D of the Act but various case laws have held that only manufacture goods are excisable goods. She further submitted that Rule 6 is not applicable even for the period after 01.03.2015 after inserting Explanation 1 to Rule 6(1) vide Notification No. 6/2015-C-EX dated 01.03.2015 for waste and by-products generated during the manufacture of final products. She further submitted that even after the by-product or waste emerges during the manufacture of final product, the entire inputs used in the manufacture of such final product should be treated as used only in the manufacture of said final product and no part of the inputs c ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 9-TIOL-338-CESTAT-BANG. Jakarya Sugars Ltd. Vs. Commr. of C.Ex., Pune-II, 2018-TIOL-1845-CESTAT-MUM. 4.2. She further submitted that Rule 6 (1) of the CCR, 2004 provides that no CENVAT credit shall be taken on inputs and input services which are used in the manufacture of exempted goods. She further submitted that CBEC Circular No. 1027/15/2016-CX dated 25.04.2016 is contrary to judicial precedents and therefore, cannot be applied in the present case. For this submission, she relied upon the following decisions: Logic India Trading Co. Vs. Commr. of Customs, Cochin, 2016 (337) ELT 65 (Tri. Bang) Affirmed by the Hon ble Supreme Court in 2016 (342) ELT A34 (SC). Commr. of C.Ex., Bhopal Vs. Minwool Rock Fibres L ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
