TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Tribunal rules soap stock as waste, not by-product, under Notification 89/95</h1> <h3>COMMISSIONER OF C. EX., HYDERABAD Versus PRIYANKA REFINERIES LTD.</h3> COMMISSIONER OF C. EX., HYDERABAD Versus PRIYANKA REFINERIES LTD. - 2010 (249) E.L.T. 70 (Tri. - Bang.) Issues:1. Application of principles of res judicata.2. Classification of soap stock as a by-product or waste for the benefit of Notification No. 89/95.Analysis:Issue 1: Application of principles of res judicataThe Tribunal considered whether the principles of res judicata would apply in the case at hand. The Tribunal referred to the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in C.K. Gangadharan v. Commr. of Income Tax, Cochin, emphasizing that the revenue cannot take opposite stands in different cases involving identical issues for the same assessee. The Tribunal noted that in previous instances, the revenue had accepted orders in favor of the respondents, and higher authorities had consciously decided not to appeal against those orders. Citing various Supreme Court cases, the Tribunal concluded that the revenue cannot adopt contradictory positions on the same issue for the same assessee. Therefore, the Tribunal held that the principles of res judicata applied, and the revenue's appeals were devoid of merits.Issue 2: Classification of soap stock for Notification No. 89/95Regarding the classification of soap stock as a by-product or waste for the benefit of Notification No. 89/95, the Tribunal analyzed the nature of soap stock arising during the manufacturing of refined vegetable oil. The revenue argued that soap stock had distinctive characteristics and uses, falling under Central Excise Tariff 1522 00 20. However, the respondents contended that soap stock was a waste product, not a by-product. The Tribunal considered the Supreme Court's decision in Khandelwal Metal & Engg. Works, which supported the respondents' argument. The Tribunal found that the respondents were engaged in refining edible oil, not manufacturing soap stock, and therefore, the soap stock was deemed a waste for the respondents. The Tribunal concluded that the revenue's arguments lacked merit both factually and legally, leading to the rejection of the revenue's appeals.In conclusion, the Tribunal upheld the lower authorities' decisions, applying the principles of res judicata and determining that the soap stock arising during the refining of vegetable oil should be considered a waste rather than a by-product for the purpose of Notification No. 89/95.
TaxTMI 