TMI Blog2022 (3) TMI 358X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ONER CENTRAL EXCISE AND CUSTOMS VERSUS ANIL PRODUCTS LTD. [ 2013 (10) TMI 798 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT] where it was held that As per RALLIS INDIA LTD. Versus UNION OF INDIA [2008 (12) TMI 46 - HIGH COURT BOMBAY] it is held that where common inputs are used in the manufacture of dutiable and exempted product, liability to pay amount under erstwhile Rule 57CC of Central Excise Rules, 1944 arises only for product and not for waste/byproduct. As find from the impugned order that the exempted products are admittedly in the nature of byproduct/ waste/residue arising during the course of manufacture of dutiable final product, the ratio of above decision of Mumbai High Court would squarely apply to the same. Thus, the provisions of Rule 6 are no ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... No. E/20872/2017 is for the subsequent period i.e September 2014 to February 2015. The appellant is a manufacturer of Maize Starch Powder, Destrose Monohydrate, Malto Dextrin Powder, High Malto Syryp, Corn Syrup Solid, Destrose Syrup, Liquid Glucose, Modified Starch etc. They are availing cenvt credit on the inputs and input services used in their final product. During the course of manufacture, some by-product emerges on the clearance of which appellant has not paid any duty. Further, the Revenue is of the view that the appellant has taken cenvat credit for the invoices issued prior to 01/09/2014 on 18/09/2014 and in terms of Notification No. 21/2014-CE (NT) dated 11/07/2014, the appellants are required to take cenvat credit within 6 month ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... efore, he submits that cenvat credit cannot be denied. 3.1. With regard to proportionate reversal of cenvat credit on inputs and input services used for by-products which has been cleared without payment of duty, he submits that the said issue has been dealt in the case of C.C.E S.T, Raipur Vs. Rajaram Maize Products vide Final Order No. 53193/2018 dated 20/09/2018 wherein it has been held that prior to 01/03/2015, the provisions of Rule 6 of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 are not applicable to the facts of the case. He also relied on the decision of Anil Products Ltd. Vs. C.C.E, Ahmedabad 2013 (296) E.L.T. 378 (Tri.-Ahmd.) which has been affirmed by the Hon ble Gujarat High Court reported in 2017 (346) E.L.T. 573 (Guj.). 4. On the oth ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... able to the appellants in these cases. Therefore, the appellants are not required to reverse the proportionate cenvat credit used in by-product while manufacturing their final product. Accordingly, the demand on the said count is set aside. 6.3. The second issue arises in Appeal No. E/20044/2017 is that whether the appellant can avail cenvat credit on the invoices issued prior to 01/09/2014 within six months after the issuance of the Notification No. 21/2014 CE (NT) dated 11/07/2014 or not? The said issue has been settled by this Tribunal in the case of Bharat Aluminium Company Limited wherein this Tribunal has observed as under: 5. Having expressed our anguish, we note that the issue is no more res Integra. Reliance can be placed t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
