9911796707
TMI Blog2023 (6) TMI 1192X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f steam and electricity which were received back by the Appellant and used in the manufacture of final products. The issue involved in the present case is on the same lines and the only difference is that in the said case the partially processed goods was CLS whereas in the instant case we are concerned with RFG but both RFG and CLS were generated on cracking of Naphtha and were sent to M/s. HPLCL for generation of electricity and steam with an intention to bring back electricity and steam for use in the manufacture of final products. To the same effect is the decision of the Tribunal in Maharashtra Aldehydes Chemicals case [ 2017 (2) TMI 367 - CESTAT MUMBAI] wherein the duty demand on the intermediate product cleared under ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t up a 116 MW Co-generation Power Plant as a Joint Venture titled, HPL Co-generation Limited ( HPLCL ), within the factory complex. During November 2000 to January 2004, the Appellant had removed Residual Fuel Gas ( RFG ) generated out of cracking Naphtha to M/s. HPLCL for generation of electricity and steam following the procedure laid down under Rule 4(5)(a) of the Cenvat Credit Rules ( CCR ),as was in force during the said period. The electricity and steam generated out of the supplied RFG was returned to the Appellant for use in manufacture of dutiable final products. 3. It is the case of the Revenue that since the RFG was an intermediate excisable product, manufactured out of cracking Naphtha, and being classifiable under chapter ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... cation under Tariff Heading 2711.90 being a non-existent tariff entry thereby revenue failing to discharge the burden of proving marketability and dutiability. Reliance in this regard was placed upon the following decisions: (i) Collector of Central Excise, Baroda Vs. United Phosphorus Ltd. [2000 (117) ELT 529] (ii) Board of Trustees Vs. Collector of Central Excise, A.P. [2007 (216) ELT 513] (d) Extended period of limitation could not be invoked as the department was kept in the know about the entire operations at the petrochemical complex including the clearance of partially processed naphtha in the form of CLS , RFG through communications dated 16 November 1999 and 15 December 2000 for job work. Moreover, the revenue ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... uch as testing, repairing, re-conditioning or any other purposes and not for complete conversion of input or partially processed input into a different entity altogether. When partially processed inputs get converted into an energy in the form of electricity, the original character of the goods known as CLS consisting of different constituents such as NRS/Py, Gas, C/4 Raffinate, C/6 Raffinate etc., are totally lost and the provisions of Rule 4(5)(a) of Cenvat Credit Rules is not applicable in such cases . This finding is not borne out from the rules. 24. We, therefore, hold that the Appellant was entitled to take Cenvat credit on the duty paid on Naphtha, sent as such, or after being partially processed ( CLS ) to the power plant for ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ity and steam for use in the manufacture of final products.The Ld. Commissioner misdirected himself in observing that this Tribunal s Order dated 28 January 2005 was not concerning dutiability of an intermediate good as Excise Appeal No. E/4001/04-A therein was concerning dutiability of an intermediate product (CLS). To the same effect is the decision of the Tribunal in Maharashtra Aldehydes Chemicalscase (supra) wherein the duty demand on the intermediate product cleared under Rule 4(5)(a) of the CCR was dropped. Since the issue is squarely covered in favour of the Appellant by the decision of the Tribunal in the Appellant s own case,we are inclined to allow the appeal of the Appellant on merits. 9. In so far as the invocation of the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
