9911796707
TMI Blog1999 (11) TMI 133X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s and other excisable products. They procured furnace oil and heavy petroleum stocks free of duty under Notification No. 75/84-C.E., dated 1-3-1984. The department alleged that in terms of procedure set out under Chapter X of the Rules, the beneficiary is required to file a return in Form R-11. In the course of scrutiny of R-11 returns and consumption formula submitted by the appellants, the department observed that during the period April, 1993 to June, 1993 the appellants were using certain quantities of furnace oil and heavy petroleum stocks for steam generation plant/nitro limestone plant. The appellants were also found using heavy petroleum stocks in the manufacture of Methanol. It was alleged that the use of petroleum stocks and furna ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... dal, ld. Consultant submits that the dispute centres around the conditions of the notification. Conditions of the notifications provided that the goods should be used as Feed Stock in the manufacture of fertilizers. He submits that the similar issue came before the Hon ble Patna High Court and that the Patna High Court in para 20 held as under :- I, therefore, hold that the petitioner is right in submitting that under the subject notification, the L.S.H.S/F.O. which is used for the purpose of generation of steam qualify as feed stock in the manufacture of fertilizer and therefore qualify for total exemption. The generation of steam is so integraly related to the ultimate manufacture of fertilizer that it must be held to be a necessary ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 985 (19) E.L.T. 617] and Narmada Valley Fertilizers Co. Limited [1994 (74) E.L.T. 109] wherein it is held that low sulphur heavy stock used for generation of steam was not eligible for exemption under Notification No. 75/84 as amended by Notification. No. 127/88. He submits that these decisions were taken by this Tribunal when the judgment of the Hon ble Patna High Court was not in existence. He, therefore prays that in view of the Patna High Court decision, the appeals may be allowed. 5. Shri K. Srivastava, ld. SDR submits that the issue is covered in favour of the Revenue by the recent decision of this Tribunal contained in Final Order Nos. 592-94/99-C, dated 14-7-1999 wherein the Tribunal held that there was no merit in the contention ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... used in the unit of the appellant and partly sent to the other units situated away from this unit. The point for consideration is whether the benefit under Notification No. 75/84 shall continue to be available to Methanol sent to the unit outside this unit. We find that the Methanol is not covered by Notification No. 75/84 what is covered is heavy petroleum stock and furnace oil. We, therefore hold that the benefit of Notification No. 75/84 shall not be available to the appellants in respect of Methanol sent to the unit away from the unit using heavy petroleum stock and furnace oil for the manufacture of Methanol. 7. These 4 appeals are disposed of in the above terms with consequential relief, if any, admissible in accordance with law. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
