https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=240388 The Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellant, determining that press-mud did not qualify as an 'exempted excisable good' under Rule 6(3) of the CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004. It held that press-mud, being a by-product and not intentionally manufactured, did not meet the criteria of a 'manufactured product' under the Central Excise Act, 1944. As press-mud did not align with the definition of manufacture, the demand on press-mud was deemed unsustainable, resulting in the grant of waiver of pre-deposit and stay of recovery for the appellant. en-us Tue, 14 Aug 2012 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 03 Dec 2013 06:36:04 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=240388 The Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellant, determining that press-mud did not qualify as an 'exempted excisable good' under Rule 6(3) of the CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004. It held that press-mud, being a by-product and not intentionally manufactured, did not meet the criteria of a 'manufactured product' under the Central Excise Act, 1944. As press-mud did not align with the definition of manufacture, the demand on press-mud was deemed unsustainable, resulting in the grant of waiver of pre-deposit and stay of recovery for the appellant. Case-Laws Central Excise Tue, 14 Aug 2012 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=240388