https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=167478 Raw petroleum coke manufactured within a refinery and used captively for calcined petroleum coke remained dutiable because it was a distinct excisable commodity, and the refinery declaration under Rule 140(2) did not create an exemption from duty. Rule 143-A was treated only as an enabling provision for operations in a declared refinery, while Rules 9 and 49 required duty on excisable goods that came into existence even for captive use. Notification No. 95/79-C.E. was unavailable because it depended on prior duty payment on the input and compliance with Rule 56A, which were absent; Notification No. 74/63 did not apply since the input was not used as fuel. The demand was upheld, subject to recomputation of the correct assessable value. en-us Wed, 10 Apr 1985 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 22 Dec 2014 10:34:05 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=167478 Raw petroleum coke manufactured within a refinery and used captively for calcined petroleum coke remained dutiable because it was a distinct excisable commodity, and the refinery declaration under Rule 140(2) did not create an exemption from duty. Rule 143-A was treated only as an enabling provision for operations in a declared refinery, while Rules 9 and 49 required duty on excisable goods that came into existence even for captive use. Notification No. 95/79-C.E. was unavailable because it depended on prior duty payment on the input and compliance with Rule 56A, which were absent; Notification No. 74/63 did not apply since the input was not used as fuel. The demand was upheld, subject to recomputation of the correct assessable value. Case-Laws Central Excise Wed, 10 Apr 1985 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=167478