9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (3) TMI 1035X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d zinc dross, the exempted goods. With these observations, the appellant was proposed to have paid duty to an amount equivalent to 6% of the value of non-excisable/exempted goods in terms of Rule 6 (1) read with Rule 6 (3) of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004. Based on those observations a Show Cause Notice No.29 dated 26.05.2020 was served upon the appellant proposing a demand of Rs.4,78,599/- to be recovered from the appellant alongwith the proportionate interest and the appropriate penalties. The proposal was initially confirmed vide Order-in-Original No. 10/21-22 dated 07.03.2022. The appeal against the said order has been rejected vide the Order-in-Appeal No.22-2023-24 dated 26.04.2023. Still being aggrieved, the appellant is before this Tribu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d Circular stands already rescinded by the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court and has in fact being withdrawn by the Department by their subsequent Circular No.1084/05/2022 dated 07.07.2022. The order is therefore, prayed to be set aside and appeal is prayed to be allowed. 5. While rebutting these submissions, ld. D.R. has mentioned that the zinc dross cleared by the appellant is a product manufactured by the appellant as it emerges in the process of the manufacture of final product by the appellant. It is also mentioned that subsequent to the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Union of India vs. M/s. DSCL Sugar Ltd. reported as 2015 (322) E.L.T. 769 (S.C.), the Circular of 2016 dated 25.04.2016 still recites that the dross ne ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e said decision though the Circular of 25.04.2016 was issued by the Department by still treating the Baggasse / dross /waste products/ byproducts etc. as the exempted goods. The relevant para is para 4.2 of the said Circular which is reproduced below:- "4.2 Consequently, Baggasse, Dross and Skimmings of non-ferrous metals or any such byproduct or waste, which are non-excisable goods and are cleared for a consideration from the factory need to be treated like exempted goods for the purpose of reversal of credit of input and input services, in terms of rule 6 of the CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004." 7. The Circular was again challenged before the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Union of India vs. Indian Sucrose Limited in SLP (C) No. 1700/2 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
