9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2024 (8) TMI 1447 - AT - Central ExciseRefund of excise duty paid under protest - duty paid on by-product molasses, on its captive consumption (being exempted under Notification No. 67/95CE dated 16.3.1995, as amended) for the manufacture of exempted final products viz., Rectified Spirit and Extra Neutral Alcohol - duty paid during April 2008 to March 2010 - HELD THAT - The issue has already been considered by this Tribunal in their own case in BANNARI SMMSN SUGAR LTD VERSUS C.C.,C.E. S. T-MYSORE 2018 (2) TMI 813 - CESTAT BANGALORE . Also taking note of the various aspects on the issue and precedent judgments and analysing the submissions made by both sides, recently this Tribunal in the case of M/S. NSL SUGARS LTD. (FORMERLY M/S. SCM SUGARS LTD.) VERSUS THE COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE MYSORE-I DIVISION, MYSORE 2024 (8) TMI 992 - CESTAT BANGALORE following the judgment rendered in the case of GODAVARI SUGAR MILLS LTD. VERSUS COMMISSIONER OF C. EX., BELGAUM 2006 (11) TMI 497 - CESTAT, BANGALORE has held ' relevant provisions of Rule 6 of CCR, 2004 has taken a view that credit on inputs availed and used in the manufacture of molasses, an input and intermediate by-product, which in turn is used in the manufacture of exempted final products viz., Ethyl Alcohol and denatured spirit, therefore, inputs attributable to the manufacture of molasses, on its reversal, is a sufficient compliance of Rule 6 of CCR, 2004; hence, eligible to the benefit of Notification No.67/95-CE dated 1.3.1995.' The impugned order is set aside and the appeal is allowed.
Issues:
Whether the appellant is eligible for a refund of excise duty paid on molasses for captive consumption for the manufacture of exempted final products under Notification No.67/1995-CE. Analysis: The case involves an appeal against an Order-in-Appeal passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise, Mangalore, regarding the appellant's claim for a refund of excise duty paid on molasses used for captive consumption. The appellant manufactures various products, including sugar, molasses, ethyl alcohol, fusel oil, and denatured spirit. They also produce non-excisable goods like Rectified Spirit and Neutral Spirit. The dispute arose when the appellant claimed a refund on the duty paid for molasses used in the manufacture of Rectified Spirit and Neutral Alcohol. The refund claim was rejected on grounds of time bar and merit by the Assistant Commissioner of Central Excise and the Commissioner (Appeals). The appellant cited a previous favorable decision by the Tribunal in their case for a similar issue. The Revenue argued that the appellant failed to submit the bifurcation figure of molasses consumed in dutiable and exempted products. The key issue in the appeal was whether the appellant was entitled to a refund of excise duty on molasses used for captive consumption for the manufacture of exempted final products. The Tribunal considered the appellant's previous case and relevant precedents. Referring to Rule 6 of the Cenvat Credit Rules, the Revenue argued that the appellant did not comply with the conditions for claiming the exemption under Notification No.67/1995-CE. The Tribunal analyzed the provisions of Rule 6 and previous judgments, including the case of Godavari Sugar Mills Ltd., to determine the eligibility for exemption. The Tribunal found that the appellant's reversal of credit attributable to inputs used in the manufacture of molasses, which is further used in the production of exempted final products, was sufficient compliance with Rule 6. Therefore, the appellant was deemed eligible for the benefit of the notification. In conclusion, the Tribunal set aside the impugned order and allowed the appeal in favor of the appellant, following the decisions and interpretations of Rule 6 and relevant precedents. The judgment emphasized the compliance of the appellant with the conditions laid down in Rule 6 for claiming the exemption on molasses used in the manufacture of exempted goods.
|
