2019 (6) TMI 1724 - AT - Central Excise

CENVAT Credit - Liability to pay 6% of the value of the bagasse and press-mud - amendment of Rule 6 (1) of the Cenvat Credit Rules by way of insertion of explanation (1) and (2) in the CCR - HELD THAT - There was no requirement for payment of 6% of the value of goods, even after the amendment of the provisions of Rule 6, the lower authorities has relied upon the decision of Hon ble Supreme Court in the case of UNION OF INDIA VERSUS DSCL SUGAR LTD. 2015 (10) TMI 566 - SUPREME COURT laying down that the bagasse and pres-mud cannot be held to be manufactured items. There are no merits in the present appeal - the appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed.

Summary

Issues involved: Interpretation of Rule 6(1) of the Cenvat Credit Rules post-amendment regarding liability to pay 6% on bagasse and press-mud cleared by a sugar manufacturer.

Summary:
The Appellate Tribunal CESTAT ALLAHABAD, comprising HON'BLE SMT. ARCHANA WADHWA, MEMBER (JUDICIAL) and HON'BLE MR. ANIL G. SHAKKARWAR, MEMBER (TECHNICAL), proceeded to decide the appeal after rejecting a stay request, citing the issue being covered by a precedent decision of the Tribunal. The central issue was whether a sugar manufacturer is liable to pay 6% on the value of bagasse and press-mud cleared post-amendment of Rule 6(1) of the Cenvat Credit Rules.

The lower authorities, in this case, relied on a Supreme Court decision in Union of India Vs DSCL Sugars, which held that bagasse and press-mud are not manufactured items. The Tribunal had previously addressed a similar issue in Commissioner of Central Excise & Service Tax, Meerut Vs M/s Bajaj Hindusthan Sugar Ltd., where the revenue's appeal was rejected based on the same premise.

In alignment with the Tribunal's previous decision, the present appeal by the revenue was deemed meritless, leading to its rejection. The stay petition was also disposed of accordingly. The judgement was dictated and pronounced in open court by HON'BLE SMT. ARCHANA WADHWA.