9911796707
TMI Blog2014 (1) TMI 1339X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... se duty could not have been allowed in view of non-disputed fact that storage loss was of 895 quintals - Decided in favour of Revenue. - CEA No. - 35 of 2009 - - - Dated:- 6-1-2014 - Ashok Bhushan and Mahesh Chandra Tripathi, JJ. For the Appellant :- Subodh Kumar, S.S.C.,S.P. Kesarwani For the Respondent :- Sudhakar Singh JUDGEMENT Mahesh Chandra Tripathi, JJ. Heard Shri V.K. Raghuvanshi, learned counsel appearing for the appellant and Shri Sudhakar Singh, learned counsel appearing for respondent M/s. Indian Potas Limited. This appeal has been filed by the Commissioner of Central Excise under Section 35G(1) of the Central Excise Act, 1944 against judgment and order dated 4.9.2008. This appeal was earlier dismissed ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sioner by order dated 30.08.04 disallowed the claim of the respondent for remission of duty amount and the application was rejected.The duty already deposited by the party was confirmed. The respondent filed an appeal before the Customs Excise and Tax Appellate Tribunal, which has been allowed by the impugned judgment dated 4.9.2008. The Tribunal, relying on the earlier judgment of Cestat Northern Bench, New Delhi as reported in 2005(191) E.L.T.696 Kisan Sahkari Chinni Mills Ltd. Versus Commissioner of Central Excise, Allahabad held that the Revenue could not show any non-accountal or illicit clearance of standard sugar and molasses obtained after reprocessing and that demand of duty is not sustainable. The finding of the Tribunal recorde ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... standard sugar. In the present case, the appellants had taken 11,751 Qtls. of BISS sugar for reprocessing and obtained 11,029 Qtls. of reprocessed Indian sugar standard and 749 Qtls, of molasses which were cleared on payment of duty. The department has demanded duty on the ground that quantity of sugar lost during reprocessing is chargeable to duty. He pleaded that during reprocessing of BISS sugar, standard sugar and molasses are generated. They have paid duty and same are duly accounted for in RT-7C return. He pleaded that duty paid on the molasses was more than the duty leviable on the sugar. Thus, there is no reason for the department to raise demand as they have fully accounted for BISS sugar taken for reprocessing. " Present case is ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
