TMI Blog2022 (1) TMI 1251X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ahabad High Court had given a clear finding to the effect that the ratio laid down in the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in UNION OF INDIA VERSUS DSCL SUGAR LTD. [ 2015 (10) TMI 566 - SUPREME COURT] case still holds the field after the insertion of explanation that was further explained through the Circular date 25.04.2016 (after the disputed period) treating bagasse to be none excisable goods, for which the Circular was quashed that was issued to explain the insertion of Exception 1 2 in Rule 6(1) w.e.f. 01.03.2015. It is needless to mention here that pressmud is a similar by-product and treated at par with bagasse, to which effect several decisions including the one reported in SAHAKAR MAHARSHI BHAUSAHEB THORAT SSK LTD VERSUS C. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n 1 2 in Rule 6(1) of CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004 w.e.f. 01.03.2015 by providing that exempted goods or final products shall include non-excisable goods cleared for consideration from the factory, was enforced enabling the Respondent-Department to raise a demand against the appellant who was basically engaged in manufacturing of sugar and molasses. 3. It would be of interest to reproduce the reasoning found available in the Order-in-Appeal, in its relevant para 20 21. 20. The appellant has also placed reliance on the case law of DSCL Sugar Ltd., [2015 (322) ELT 769 (SC)] on the issue of bagasse. In this context, in all humility it is observed that the ratio-decidendi as laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Jai Bh ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sioner (Appeals) had not tried to distinguish the judgment passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in M/s. DSCL Sugar Ltd. Others case but had got beyond his authority to hold that the said judgment is per incuriam in an indirect way by holding that ratio of its earlier order passed in the case of Jai Bhagwan Oil Flour Mill Ltd. had not been placed before the Hon'ble Supreme Court and thereby disregarded the importance and value of judicial precedent. In this context, it is worthwhile to refer to the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court passed in the case of Gangadhara Palo Vs. RDO reported in [2012 (25) STR 273 (SC)] in which it was stated that judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court containing reasons, however meagre (even one ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
