TMI Blog2020 (5) TMI 199X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the precedent decision of Division Bench of this Tribunal in the appellant s own case COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE-LUDHIANA VERSUS M/S UNITED BREWERIES LTD. [2015 (6) TMI 262 - CESTAT NEW DELHI] where it was held that just because, the respondent were purchasing carbondioxide from other suppliers, it cannot be presumed that the carbondioxide generated in their unit was of the same character an ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... lant for purification of Carbon dioxide. Further, admitted fact is that the impure Carbon dioxide gas arises in the course of manufacture of beer as by-product which was being stored by them in tanks and thereafter liquefied. The said Carbon dioxide was subsequently used by the appellant for carbonation of beer. Further, beer being a product containing alcohol (for human consumption) does not attr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... confirmed on contest along with interest. Being aggrieved, the appellant preferred appeal before Commissioner (Appeals), who have dismissed the appeal upholding the order-in-original. Being aggrieved, the appellant is before this Tribunal. 3. Heard the parties. 4. Having considered the rival submissions, I find that the issue herein is squarely covered by the precedent decision of Division ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hat the respondent were purchasing carbondioxide from other breweries. The carbondioxide being purchased by the respondent was from carbondioxide manufacturers and there is merit in the respondent s plea that the carbondioxide purchased from the carbondioxide manufacturers is not comparable with the gas which was being produced in their factory. Therefore, just because, the respondent were purchas ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
