9911796707
TMI Blog2023 (2) TMI 988X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e heard learned authorised representative for the Revenue and learned counsel for the Respondent assessee and perused the records. 2. The undisputed facts of the case are that the respondent manufactures aluminum ingots and is registered with the Central Excise department. It avails credit of the excise duty paid on inputs and the service tax paid on input services as CENVAT and uses it to pay central excise duty. In the process of manufacture of aluminum ingots, aluminum dross/skimmings arise as waste/refuse which the respondent sells. This dross and skimmings are not excisable goods and no excise duty is paid by the respondent on them. 3. The respondent was audited by the Central Excise audit team for the period April 2014 to March 2015 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ment of 6% of the value of the exempted or non-excisable goods when they are also manufactured along with dutiable goods does not apply to dross and skimmings. She placed on record CBIC circular No. 1084/05/2022-CX dated 7.7.2022, which is as follows: "3. Accordingly, Circular No. 1027/15/2016-CX., dated 25-4-2016 [2016 (335) E.L.T. (T13)] was issued highlighting that Bagasse, Dross and Skimmings of non-ferrous metals or any such by-product or waste, which are non-excisable goods and are cleared for a consideration from the factory need to be treated like exempted goods for the purpose of reversal of credit of input and input services, in terms of rule 6 of the CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004. This circular was issued in the background of judgm ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... be examined in the light of the Rule regardless of the Circular. It is also his submission that the Circular was issued considering the judgments of the Supreme Court before amendments to the CCR (when an amount under Rule 6 had to be paid only when exempted goods and not non-excisable goods were cleared) but Rule 6 has been amended subsequently. On a specific query from the bench as to whether the Circular was issued after the amendment or before, he fairly submits that it was issued after the amendment. 8. The submission of the learned authorised representative that CBIC's circular should not be applied in this case even though it squarely covers the case because the Rule has not been amended cannot be accepted. The circular was issued ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
