https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=382786 The appellate court ruled in favor of the appellant, a manufacturer, stating that fly ash, as a residual waste and not a manufactured product, should not attract excise duty or require reversal under Rule 6 of the Cenvat Credit Rules. The court considered the appellant's argument that fly ash was a byproduct of electricity generation and not a manufactured product subject to excise duty. Citing relevant legal provisions and judicial precedents, the court set aside the impugned order and granted the appeal in favor of the appellant, providing consequential benefits. en-us Mon, 13 May 2019 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 11 Jul 2019 06:12:28 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=382786 The appellate court ruled in favor of the appellant, a manufacturer, stating that fly ash, as a residual waste and not a manufactured product, should not attract excise duty or require reversal under Rule 6 of the Cenvat Credit Rules. The court considered the appellant's argument that fly ash was a byproduct of electricity generation and not a manufactured product subject to excise duty. Citing relevant legal provisions and judicial precedents, the court set aside the impugned order and granted the appeal in favor of the appellant, providing consequential benefits. Case-Laws Central Excise Mon, 13 May 2019 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=382786