https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=389636 The Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellant, holding that Rule 6(3) of the CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004 did not apply to the demand for 6% payment on electricity sold outside the factory. The Tribunal determined that since the electricity generation from by-products like bagasse did not involve dutiable goods or the use of cenvatable inputs, the demand was unsustainable. Additionally, the Tribunal clarified that Rule 6 requires separate account maintenance only when a common input used for both exempted and dutiable goods is involved, which was not the case here. The Tribunal's decision set aside the demand and allowed the appeal with consequential relief. en-us Tue, 10 Dec 2019 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 12 Dec 2019 13:01:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=389636 The Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellant, holding that Rule 6(3) of the CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004 did not apply to the demand for 6% payment on electricity sold outside the factory. The Tribunal determined that since the electricity generation from by-products like bagasse did not involve dutiable goods or the use of cenvatable inputs, the demand was unsustainable. Additionally, the Tribunal clarified that Rule 6 requires separate account maintenance only when a common input used for both exempted and dutiable goods is involved, which was not the case here. The Tribunal's decision set aside the demand and allowed the appeal with consequential relief. Case-Laws Central Excise Tue, 10 Dec 2019 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=389636