Soap stock from groundnut oil refining qualifies for exemption under Notification 89/95 CE as waste product

The CESTAT NEW DELHI held that soap stock arising during groundnut refined oil manufacture from April 2006 to February 2015 qualifies for exemption under Notification No. 89/95 CE. Following the Larger Bench decision in Ricela Health Foods Ltd., the tribunal ruled that fatty acids, waxes, and gum produced during vegetable oil refining constitute waste rather than manufactured excisable goods. The court emphasized that commercial value cannot determine whether a product is manufactured goods or waste. Relying on Indian Aluminium Co. Ltd. SC precedent, removal of unwanted materials during refining does not constitute manufacturing. The impugned order was set aside and appeal allowed.

---

---

Issues Involved:
1. Excisability of Soap Stock arising during the manufacture of groundnut refined oil.
2. Applicability of Notification No. 89/95-CE for exemption.
3. Determination of intent to evade duty and imposition of penalties.

Summary:

1. Excisability of Soap Stock:
The appellant, M/s Jugal Kishore Vanaspati Products (P) Ltd., contested the excise duty demand on Soap Stock, arguing it was not a manufactured product. They cited chapter notes and legal precedents, including the Bombay High Court decision in Indian Aluminium vs A.K. Bandyopadhyay, asserting that Soap Stock, like dross and skimmings, is a by-product or waste, not a distinct manufactured article. The Tribunal noted that the process of refining groundnut oil does not intentionally produce Soap Stock as a primary product, and thus, it should not be considered as manufactured goods under section 2(f) of the Central Excise Act.

2. Applicability of Notification No. 89/95-CE:
The Commissioner (Appeals) had denied the exemption under Notification No. 89/95-CE, but the Tribunal referenced the Larger Bench decision in Ricela Health Foods Ltd. vs Commissioner, which held that unintended by-products like fatty acids, waxes, and gums arising during oil refining are considered waste and not manufactured goods. This view was supported by the Supreme Court in Commissioner of Central Excise, Chandigarh vs Marico Ltd. The Tribunal concluded that Soap Stock is akin to waste and thus eligible for exemption under Notification No. 89/95-CE.

3. Intent to Evade Duty and Imposition of Penalties:
The Commissioner (Appeals) had upheld the penalties, asserting that the appellant intended to evade duty by not seeking clarification post-withdrawal of Notification No. 115/75-CE. However, given the Tribunal's determination that Soap Stock is not a manufactured product and is exempt under Notification No. 89/95-CE, the basis for penalties was invalidated.

Conclusion:
The Tribunal set aside the impugned order, recognizing Soap Stock as non-excisable waste eligible for exemption, and allowed the appeals, nullifying the excise duty demand and associated penalties.

---