<?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>2026 (2) TMI 1270 - CESTAT AHMEDABAD</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=787122</link>
    <description>Bagasse, press mud and bio-compost arising inevitably in sugar manufacture were treated as waste or residue, not manufactured final products. The Tribunal applied settled law that Rule 6 of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 operates only where exempted final products are manufactured, and not where non-excisable by-products or waste emerge during production of dutiable goods. The amendment to section 2(d) of the Central Excise Act, 1944 and departmental circulars did not change that position, because saleability alone did not make such waste excisable goods. Rule 6 was therefore held inapplicable, and the demand for reversal of credit or payment of 5% was set aside.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 25 Feb 2026 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 27 Feb 2026 08:36:11 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=888207" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2026 (2) TMI 1270 - CESTAT AHMEDABAD</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=787122</link>
      <description>Bagasse, press mud and bio-compost arising inevitably in sugar manufacture were treated as waste or residue, not manufactured final products. The Tribunal applied settled law that Rule 6 of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 operates only where exempted final products are manufactured, and not where non-excisable by-products or waste emerge during production of dutiable goods. The amendment to section 2(d) of the Central Excise Act, 1944 and departmental circulars did not change that position, because saleability alone did not make such waste excisable goods. Rule 6 was therefore held inapplicable, and the demand for reversal of credit or payment of 5% was set aside.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 25 Feb 2026 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=787122</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>