<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>Tribunal exempts Aluminium dross from excise duty, citing errors in CENVAT Rule application and overlooked precedents.</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=75456</link>
    <description>CENVAT Credit - waste/by-product generated i.e. Aluminium dross during the manufacture of Aluminium products from Alumina in the appellant&#039;s factory which is sold by the appellant without payment of duty - exempt goods or not - The Tribunal allowed the appeal, holding that the appellant is not liable to pay excise duty on the clearance of &quot;Aluminium dross&quot; based on several grounds. - The order under challenge erred in applying Rule 6 of CCR, 2004 based on the rescinded circular, and the Commissioner (Appeals) failed to consider the implications of the Supreme Court&#039;s decision in Sucrose India (supra) and the Circular dated 07.07.2022.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 07 Mar 2024 09:07:10 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 07 Mar 2024 09:07:10 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=745963" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>Tribunal exempts Aluminium dross from excise duty, citing errors in CENVAT Rule application and overlooked precedents.</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=75456</link>
      <description>CENVAT Credit - waste/by-product generated i.e. Aluminium dross during the manufacture of Aluminium products from Alumina in the appellant&#039;s factory which is sold by the appellant without payment of duty - exempt goods or not - The Tribunal allowed the appeal, holding that the appellant is not liable to pay excise duty on the clearance of &quot;Aluminium dross&quot; based on several grounds. - The order under challenge erred in applying Rule 6 of CCR, 2004 based on the rescinded circular, and the Commissioner (Appeals) failed to consider the implications of the Supreme Court&#039;s decision in Sucrose India (supra) and the Circular dated 07.07.2022.</description>
      <category>Highlights</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 07 Mar 2024 09:07:10 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=75456</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>