Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

2022 (11) TMI 919

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ) VERSUS COMMISSIONER OF GST CENTRAL EXCISE [ 2019 (7) TMI 733 - CESTAT CHENNAI ] in which the Tribunal while dealing with the aforesaid amendment in Rule 6 ibid allowed the Appeal filed by the appellant and held that when the zinc scrap, a waste arising out of process of manufacture of finished goods, is not the goods manufactured by the appellant, the same cannot be considered as exempted goods manufactured by them - In yet another case similar view has been taken by the Bangalore Bench of the Tribunal in SHRI LAKSHMI METAL UDYOG LTD VERSUS COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL TAX, BANGALURU SOUTH COMMISSIONERATE [ 2019 (8) TMI 420 - CESTAT BANGALORE] . In view of the series of decisions of different Benches of the Tribunal deciding the issue .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... Authority vide separate Orders-in-Original dated 14.12.2018 21.1.2019 respectively confirmed the demand with interest penalty and the same was upheld by the learned Commissioner (Appeal) vide common Order-in-Appeal dated 25.6.2019. 3. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that they are manufacturing pipes and not zinc scrap and that during the manufacture of excisable goods, unusable waste/residue is generated which is sold as zinc dross/cyclone/ash in the open market. He also submits that Rule 6 ibid has no application on the facts of this case. He further submits that the said issue has already been decided in Appellant s own case by the Chennai Bench of the Tribunal and therefore the demand is liable to be set aside on that gr .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... on (1) introduced w.e.f. 01.03.2015 to demand the duty raised in the SCN. It has to be seen that though the said Explanation puts forward a deeming provision that non-excisable goods cleared by payment of consideration are also to be considered as exempted goods, there is no corresponding amendment made in sub-rule (1) of Rule 6 so that the goods that emerged out of process of manufacture falling in clause (1) are also to be considered as exempted goods. As per settled decisions, the goods which are not consciously manufactured by the appellants and which emerged in the process of manufacture cannot be considered as goods manufactured by the appellants. Thus, when the zinc scrap which is a waste arising out of process of manufacture of fini .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... percentage of the value of non-excisable goods removed when Cenvat Credit on input and input services were availed and such inputs and input services were used in the manufacture of excisable as well as exempted goods including non-excisable goods. Therefore proceedings were initiated against the respondent for recovery of around Rs.44.00 Lakhs. On perusal of record I note that the issue is covered by precedent decision in respondent s own case in respect of their another unit through Final Order No.70801/2019 dated 18.04.2019. It was held in the said Final Order that Press Mud and Bagasse are not arising out of manufacturing activity and the same are agricultural waste and residue and therefore since the said Final Order is applicable in t .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... s. It is the Revenue s case that as per the amendment carried in the said Rule with effect from 01/03/2015, the non-excisable goods have to be treated as exempted goods and as such the appellant was required to pay a particular percentage of the value of the zinc scrap. 4. I find that the issue stands decided by the earlier decision of the Tribunal. Particular reference can be made to the Tribunal decision in the case of M/s APL Apollo Tubes Ltd. Final Order No.40925/2019 dated 12/07/2019 vide which an identical situation was considered by the Tribunal and the dispute was resolved in favour of the assessee. xxx xxx xxx 5. Inasmuch as the issue stands decided, I set aside the impugned order and allow the appeal with consequen .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates