2016 (12) TMI 1692

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... llant to enjoy exemption benefit under N/N. 115/75-C.E., dated 30-4-1975? Held that: - Revenue did not rule out that ‘Vanaspati’ manufactured by a “oil mill” is also eligible to get exemption under the aforesaid notification - also, manufacture of soap stock was not ruled out by Revenue nor disputed that the same was marketable. Exemption allowed - appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant.

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... actured by oil mill industry and soap stock comes out of processing of Vanaspati. The goods came out in the cause of manufacture of Vanaspati was marketable. That met twin test of manufacture and marketability as prescribed by Apex Court judgment in the case of Board of Trustees v. CCE, A.P. - 2007 (216) E.L.T. 513 (S.C.). The exemption claimed by appellant in respect of the soap stock is therefor .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... nal in the case of Godrej Foods Ltd. v. CCE, Mumbai - 1999 (107) E.L.T. 449 (Tribunal), CCE, Jaipur v. Mehta Vegetable Products (P) Ltd. v. CCE - 1994 (71) E.L.T. 366 (Tribunal) and Rajadhiraj Industries v. CCE, Indore - 1994 (69) E.L.T. 148 (Tribunal) without any reason of decision stated therein. We did not find any ratio in all such cases of the Tribunal. Therefore we make it clear that our dec .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X