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 distilled fatty acid obtained after hydrogenation of rice bran oil outside the soap manufacturing factory was an eligible input for credit under Rule 57K of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 read with Notification No. 46/89-C.E. (N.T.) dated 11-10-1989.
Analysis: The notification specifically provided that where the processes of hydrogenation or hydrolysis were carried out outside the factory manufacturing soap, credit would be admissible. The Tribunal found that rice bran oil was subjected to hydrogenation outside the factory and distilled fatty acids resulted from that process. The restrictive reading suggested by the Revenue would make the express notification provision redundant, because the notification itself contemplated credit in cases where the intermediate product arose from those processes. The issue was also covered by the earlier decision of the Supreme Court on similar facts.
Conclusion: The intermediate product was eligible for credit and no referable question of law arose.
Final Conclusion: The reference application was rejected, leaving the assessee's entitlement to credit undisturbed.
Ratio Decidendi: Where a notification expressly allows credit for products arising from specified processes carried out outside the manufacturing factory, that express allowance prevails over a narrow construction based only on whether the resulting product is a separately specified input.