TMI Blog2020 (2) TMI 183X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... A, MEMBER (JUDICIAL) Shri Deepak Marne, Cost Accountant, for the Appellant Ms. A.S. Parab, AC (AR), for the Respondent ORDER Per: Dr. D.M. Misra This appeal is filed by the appellant challenging the Order-in-Appeal No. NSK/EXCUSS/000/APPL/154/18-19 dated 16.07.2018 passed by the Commissioner (Appeals), GST Central Excise, Nashik. 2. Briefly stated the facts of the case are that the appellants are engaged in the manufacture of sugar and molasses falling under Chapter 1701 and 1703 of Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985. Alleging that during the period March, 2015 to November, 2015, the appellant had cleared the exempted goods namely, Pressmud and Boiler Ash emerged as a by-product/waste, without reversing the amoun ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Khand Udyog (supra), this Tribunal observed as follows: - 5. I find that the department has dropped the demand on the byproduct Bagasse for the period prior to 01.03.2015. However, on insertion of explanation I to Rule 6 of CCR, 2004 by virtue of Notification No. 6/2015-CE(NT) dt. 1.3.2015 a view was taken by the department that bagasse being not an excisable goods and cleared from the factory, against consideration, therefore, would come within the scope of Rule 6 of the CCR, 2004. The said provision, reads as follows:- Explanation I. For the purposes of this Rule, exempted goods or final products as defined in clauses (d) and (h) of Rule 2 shall include non-excisable goods cleared for a consideration from the factory . ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... any excise duty. 11. Since if is not a manufacture, obviously Rule 6 of the Cenvat Rules, 2004, shall have no application as rightly held by the High Court. 7. Following the aforesaid ratio, I do not have any hesitation to hold that even after amendment to Rule 6 of CCR, 2004, bagasse which emerges as a waste/byproduct, accordingly, falls outside the scope of the Rule, 6 of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004. In the result, the impugned order is set-aside and the appeal is allowed with consequential relief, if any, as per law. 7. The principle laid down in DSCL Limited s case, has been accepted by the Department by issuance of Circular N. 1027/15/2016-CX dated 25.04.2016, following the aforesaid precedent, the impugned order is ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
