<?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>2024 (8) TMI 992 - CESTAT BANGALORE</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=757288</link>
    <description>CESTAT Bangalore allowed the appeal regarding refund of excise duty paid on molasses, a by-product of sugar manufacturing. The appellant manufactured sugar and used molasses captively to produce both dutiable products (Fuse Oil, Denatured Spirit, Ethyl Alcohol, Carbon dioxide) and exempted products (Rectified Spirit, Extra Neutral Alcohol). The tribunal held that molasses used in manufacturing exempted products qualified for exemption under Notification 67/95-CE dated 16.3.1995. Since the appellant had reversed proportionate credit attributable to molasses manufacture, they satisfied Rule 6 of CCR 2004 requirements, making them eligible for the notification benefit. The impugned order was set aside and refund claim allowed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 20 Aug 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 21 Aug 2024 14:20:20 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=764908" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2024 (8) TMI 992 - CESTAT BANGALORE</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=757288</link>
      <description>CESTAT Bangalore allowed the appeal regarding refund of excise duty paid on molasses, a by-product of sugar manufacturing. The appellant manufactured sugar and used molasses captively to produce both dutiable products (Fuse Oil, Denatured Spirit, Ethyl Alcohol, Carbon dioxide) and exempted products (Rectified Spirit, Extra Neutral Alcohol). The tribunal held that molasses used in manufacturing exempted products qualified for exemption under Notification 67/95-CE dated 16.3.1995. Since the appellant had reversed proportionate credit attributable to molasses manufacture, they satisfied Rule 6 of CCR 2004 requirements, making them eligible for the notification benefit. The impugned order was set aside and refund claim allowed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 20 Aug 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=757288</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>