2019 (8) TMI 254 - AT - Central Excise

Appeal success: Spent solvents/sludge not excise duty chargeable. Transformation needed for new product creation. Prevailing legal argument.

The appeal was allowed in favor of the appellant, as the Bench upheld that spent solvents and sludge arising during the manufacturing process of ... Valuation - residue - leftover solvents known as ‘spent solvents’ - Department was of the opinion that these are goods which are manufactured / produced by the appellant along with the final products and are therefore chargeable to excise duty at appropriate rates - HELD THAT:- In the same issue for a different period, this Bench in M/S. ORCHID PHARMA LTD. (FORMERLY M/S. ORCHID CHEMICALS & PHARMACEUTICALS LTD.) VERSUS THE COMMISSIONER OF G.S.T. & CENTRAL EXCISE, CHENNAI NORTH [2019 (2) TMI 10 - CESTAT CHENNAI] held that no duty is chargeable on the spent solvents / sludge which arises during the process of manufacture of the final products. Appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant. Issues:1. Whether spent solvents and sludge arising during the manufacturing process are chargeable to excise duty.Analysis:The appeal was filed against an Order-in-Appeal regarding the chargeability of excise duty on spent solvents and sludge produced during the manufacturing process of pharmaceutical products. The appellant argued that a previous decision by the same Bench had held that these products are not subject to excise duty. The appellant contended that spent solvents and sludge are not manufactured or produced separately but arise during the manufacturing of final products. The appellant relied on legal principles emphasizing that excise duty is levied on manufactured goods and that the goods must satisfy the test of being produced or manufactured in India. The appellant highlighted the necessity of a transformation leading to the creation of a new and distinct product for excise duty imposition. The appellant presented precedents and judgments supporting their position.The Revenue, on the other hand, argued that the goods in question were marketable as they were bought and sold by the appellant, making them liable for excise duty. The Revenue referred to the Explanation to section 2(d) of the Central Excise Act, which broadened the definition of 'goods' to include any article capable of being bought and sold. The Revenue cited a Tribunal case and a High Court judgment to support their stance that similar products arising during the manufacturing process were chargeable to excise duty. However, the Revenue could not confirm if the previous order favoring the appellant had been stayed or set aside by a higher judicial forum.Upon considering the arguments and records, the Bench noted that a previous final order had already determined that no excise duty was chargeable on spent solvents and sludge produced during the manufacturing process of the final products for the same appellant. The Bench relied on the judgments of the Hon'ble Apex Court and previous decisions to uphold their decision. Consequently, the appeal was allowed in favor of the appellant, with any consequential relief granted.In conclusion, the judgment clarified that spent solvents and sludge arising during the manufacturing process of pharmaceutical products were not chargeable to excise duty based on legal principles and precedents. The decision was consistent with a previous ruling by the same Bench, emphasizing the importance of the manufacturing process and the creation of distinct products for excise duty imposition.