9911796707
TMI Blog2007 (8) TMI 135X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... refund claim of appellant - 72-74/2005 - 938-940/2007 - Dated:- 14-8-2007 - [Order]. - The appeal No. E/290/05 is filed by the Revenue against the impugned order setting aside two orders of the original authority Nos. 10/2004 and 11/2004 both dated 4-10-2004. The original authority had demanded respectively Rs. 86,053/- and Rs. 38,886/- being 8% of the sale price of gypsum and garnet which a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... pugned order, the Commissioner (Appeals) found that garnet was a waste product which was left over after separation of Ilmenite by electromagnetic separation from Ilmenite ore. Similarly, gypsum was waste sediment which remained in the salt pans after removal of salt. In harvesting salt, motors and pumps were used for pumping water. Gypsum was dug out from the salt pans after the salt was removed. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... are attracted. The impugned order therefore deserved to be set aside. 3. The ld. Counsel for the respondents argues that garnet and gypsum are waste products which emerge in the process of manufacture of Ilmenite and salt. Even if the exempted byproducts emerged in the course of manufacture of final products using common inputs, excise law does not require that any amount has to be paid by the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... earing by the Division Bench was directed to be linked with the Appeal No. E/290/04, during the hearing of the latter appeal on 22-8-2007. In this appeal the appellants DCW has sought to set aside the impugned order confirming the order of the original authority directing payment of 8% of the sale price of garnet and gypsum. The demand in the subject case relates to removals of garnet and gypsum d ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
