Fly ash from coal burning for electricity production not manufactured goods under Section 2(f) Central Excise Act 1944

CESTAT Ahmedabad held that fly ash generated from burning coal for electricity production does not constitute "manufactured goods" under Section 2(f) of Central Excise Act, 1944. Following SC precedent in Union of India v. Ahmedabad Electricity Co. Ltd., the tribunal ruled that coal burning for power generation does not amount to manufacture since coal is not raw material for fly ash production but for electricity generation. Fly ash emerges inevitably in the process without skilful manipulation or transformation. Therefore, fly ash is not liable to excise duty. Appeal allowed, impugned order set aside.

---

---

Issues involved:
Whether fly ash arising from burning coal is considered manufactured goods under the Central Excise Act, 1944 and is liable to excise duty.

Analysis:
The main issue in this case is whether fly ash generated from burning coal for power generation constitutes manufacturing and is subject to excise duty. The appellant argues that fly ash does not amount to "manufacture" as defined under the Central Excise Act, as there must be a new product with distinct characteristics and marketability for excise duty to apply. Several court decisions, including Moti Laminates v. CCE and Indian Aluminium, support this interpretation. The appellant also cites the Supreme Court's ruling in Union of India v. Ahmedabad Electricity Company Limited, where it was held that the generation of cinder from burning coal does not constitute manufacturing. The Hon'ble Tribunal has also held that notifications cannot create a levy when there is none, as seen in cases like Kiran Spinning Mills v. CCE.

The respondent, represented by the Deputy Commissioner, supports the findings of the impugned order.

The Hon'ble Tribunal, after considering the arguments from both sides, relies on the Supreme Court's precedent in Union of India v. Ahmedabad Electricity Company Limited to conclude that the generation of fly ash from burning coal for power generation does not amount to manufacturing and is not subject to excise duty. The Tribunal emphasizes that coal is used as fuel for power generation, not as a raw material for manufacturing fly ash, and therefore, fly ash does not undergo a manufacturing process. The Tribunal also references the Madras High Court's decision in CBIC v. Mettur Thermal Power Station, where it was held that fly ash generated during coal burning is not a manufactured good and is not liable to duty. The Tribunal sets aside the impugned order and allows the appeal based on these legal principles.

In conclusion, the Tribunal's decision is based on established legal precedents that burning coal for power generation and the resulting fly ash do not constitute manufacturing under the Central Excise Act, and therefore, fly ash is not liable to excise duty.

---