Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether Solvent-75 and Paraldehyde were eligible for money credit under Notification No. 231/87 dated 1-10-1987 issued under Rule 57K of the Central Excise Rules, 1944.
Analysis: The issue was covered by an earlier Tribunal order concerning the same inputs and the same notification. In that order, both Paraldehyde and Solvent-75 were held not to be waste products but furnished products in their own right. Since they were not specified in Notification No. 231/87, the benefit of money credit under Rule 57K was held to be unavailable. That reasoning was applied to the present case.
Conclusion: The appellants were not eligible for money credit under Rule 57K, and the impugned order was upheld.
Final Conclusion: The appeal failed on merits and the departmental cross-objection was also dismissed.
Ratio Decidendi: Where the final products are themselves manufactured goods and are not specified in the relevant notification, they do not qualify for money credit under Rule 57K.