Manufacturer Appeals Order on Cenvat Credit; Relief Granted on Bagasse Treatment

The Tribunal allowed the appeal of a sugar and molasses manufacturer against an order requiring payment for using common inputs in manufacturing both dutiable and exempted final products. The appellant's failure to maintain separate accounts led to a demand for recovery under the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004. The Assistant Commissioner's decision was upheld, but the Tribunal granted relief based on a legal precedent regarding the treatment of bagasse in Cenvat matters, requiring the appellant to pay a cost to the 'Prime Minister's National Relief Fund'.

---

---

Issues:
1. Appeal against Order-in-Appeal No. 193/CE/LKO/2014
2. Use of common inputs in manufacturing dutiable and exempted final products
3. Demand of recovery under Rule 14 of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004
4. Imposition of penalty under Rule 15 of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004
5. Appeal dismissal due to delay in filing

Analysis:
1. The appellant, a sugar and molasses manufacturer, appealed against Order-in-Appeal No. 193/CE/LKO/2014, which required payment due to the use of common inputs in manufacturing both dutiable and exempted final products.

2. The appellant did not maintain separate accounts for inputs used in manufacturing exempted products, leading to a demand for recovery under Rule 14 of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004. A show cause notice was issued, demanding payment and imposing interest and penalty.

3. The Assistant Commissioner confirmed the demand under Section 11A(1) of Central Excise Act, 1944, along with interest and penalty. The appellant's appeal to the Commissioner (Appeals) was dismissed due to filing beyond the statutory period without providing reasons for the delay.

4. The Tribunal considered the issue of reversal of Cenvat on bagasse, citing a favorable decision by the Apex Court in a previous case. The Tribunal allowed the appeal, subject to the appellant paying a cost of &8377; 10,000 to the 'Prime Minister's National Relief Fund' by a specified date.

5. The judgment was pronounced in open court, granting relief to the appellant based on the legal precedent cited regarding the treatment of bagasse in Cenvat matters.

---