https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=331629 The appellant was required to pay a percentage of the value of bagasse and pressmud cleared without duty payment. However, based on the Supreme Court's ruling and Circular No.1027/15/2016-CX, which established that by-products like bagasse are not excisable goods, the court found in favor of the appellant. The judgment questioned the retrospective nature of an explanation added to the Cenvat Credit Rules, leading to the conclusion that the impugned order was unsustainable. Consequently, the order was set aside, and the appeal was allowed in favor of the appellant. en-us Tue, 24 May 2016 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 27 Dec 2016 16:37:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=331629 The appellant was required to pay a percentage of the value of bagasse and pressmud cleared without duty payment. However, based on the Supreme Court's ruling and Circular No.1027/15/2016-CX, which established that by-products like bagasse are not excisable goods, the court found in favor of the appellant. The judgment questioned the retrospective nature of an explanation added to the Cenvat Credit Rules, leading to the conclusion that the impugned order was unsustainable. Consequently, the order was set aside, and the appeal was allowed in favor of the appellant. Case-Laws Central Excise Tue, 24 May 2016 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=331629