2011 (2) TMI 1064 - AT - Central Excise

Cenvat credit on waste - Pellets of less than 6 mm is a waste for assessee as it cannot be used by them in their manufacturing process - Held that - As in the case of Collector v. Rajasthan State Chemical Works (1991 (9) TMI 73 - SUPREME COURT OF INDIA) held that the process of handling / lifting / pumping / transfer / transportation of raw materials also a process in or in relation to the manufacture, it integrally connected with further operations, which constitute manufacture, credit has been correctly availed and revenue s appeal dismissed.

Summary

Issues:
1. Whether CENVAT credit taken on iron ore pellets procured by appellants, which were later segregated as waste, should be reversed.
2. Whether the process of segregating iron ore pellets below 6 mm size before the manufacturing process constitutes a manufacturing process as per the Act.
3. Whether the decision in the appellants' own case regarding iron ore fines being considered waste material applies to the current case.

Analysis:
1. The appeals were against the Order-in-Appeal dated 19.07.2007, where the revenue authorities contended that CENVAT credit taken on iron ore pellets later treated as waste should be reversed. The Commissioner (Appeals) set aside the order-in-original, stating that the iron ore pellets below 6 mm size, segregated before the manufacturing process, should not be considered a result of the manufacturing process. The appellants argued that a similar issue in their own case had been decided in their favor by the Tribunal previously.

2. The Tribunal analyzed the previous decision in the appellants' own case, where it was held that the fines of size less than 3 mm were waste material arising during the manufacturing process, and the generation of fines was inevitable due to transportation. The Tribunal concluded that the manufacturing process started from the stage of screening, and since the fines were waste for the appellants and could not be used in their manufacturing process, the credit availed on such fines could not be denied. The Tribunal cited relevant legal provisions and precedents to support its decision.

3. Referring to the findings in the previous case, the Tribunal upheld that the fines being waste material could not be equated with the clearance of inputs, and hence, the provision of Section 57AB could not be applied. The Tribunal dismissed the revenue's appeal and upheld the Commissioner's decision to drop the demand. Based on the consistent findings in the previous case and the legal principles applied, the Tribunal set aside the impugned order and allowed the appeals in favor of the appellants.