9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (9) TMI 1022X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sentative Per: H.K. Thakur This appeal has been filed by the Appellant against OIA No. CCEA-SRT-I/SSP-370/2012-13/U/S 35A(3)(Final Order), dt.25.02.13. The issue involved is whether the bi-products Baggase and Press Mud arising during the process of manufacture of excisable goods i.e. Sugar should be considered as exempted goods for the purpose of reversing of an amount equivalent to 5% or 10% u ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 3. Heard both sides and perused the case records. It is observed that in the case of Balrampur Chinni Mills Vs UoI [2014 (300) ELT 372 (All.), Hon'ble Allahabad High Court, after considering the Apex Court decision dt.21.07.2010 held that there was no manufacturing involved when the sugar is crushed leading to generation of Bagasse. Hon'ble Allahabad High Court in Paras 18 & 29, held as follows:- ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... llified the judgment and order dated 21-7-2010 rendered in Civil Appeal No. 2791 of 2005." 4. Similarly, in the case of Hindalco Industries Vs UoI [2015 (315) ELT 10 (Guj.)] also Bombay High Court set aside the CBEC Circular No.904/24/2009-CX, dt.28.10.2009 and Circular No.941/02/2011-CX dt.14.02.2011. 5. In view of the above settled position of law, the reliance placed by First Appellate Author ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
