TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2006 (7) TMI 411
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....r raised by the Commissioner in the misc. application is seriously opposed by the learned Counsel on the ground that this Bench cannot proceed to adjudicate a matter which was not the subject matter of the Show Cause Notice and the impugned order. In this regard, he relies on the Apex Court judgments rendered in the case of Gujarat State Fertilizers Co. v. CCE - 1997 (91) E.L.T. 3 (S.C.) wherein the Apex Court has clearly laid down that the Tribunal cannot adjudicate on a matter which was not the subject matter of the proceedings before the original authority. 4. On our careful consideration, we notice that the ground now raised in the misc. application was not the subject matter of Show Cause Notice or the adjudication order. As the issue now raised is not the subject matter of the impugned order, the prayer made in the misc. application cannot be considered in the light of the Apex Court judgments referred to by the learned Counsel. The misc. applications are, therefore, rejected. 5. In all these four appeals, the issue is common arising from four adjudication orders viz. (i) 29/2005, dated 8-12-2005; (ii) 28/2005, dated 16-11-2005; (iii) 18/2005, dated 6-7-2005; ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....r emerging in the process of manufacture of methyl nitro imidazole is a by-product and Rule 57CC is not applicable to by-product. [para 11 of the decision]. 6. Alcobex Metals Ltd. v. CCE - 2004 (168) E.L.T. 455 (T). Industrial dust arising during manufacture of brass and copper are not excisable. [para 4 of the decision]. 7. Madras Aluminium Co. Ltd. v. CCE - 2006 (193) E.L.T. 98 (Tri.) = 2005 (126) ECR 317 (T) Red mud emerging as a waste during manufacture of aluminium from Bauxite and sold for a price. Since accumulation would cause environmental pollution, the Tribunal held that Red mud is not excisable. [paras 4 & 5 of the decision]. 8. EID Parry (India) Limited v. CCE - 2004 (176) E.L.T. 734 (T-Che.) Chemicals used as inputs in manufacture of sugar viz. a dutiable product and not in the manufacture of bio-compost, an exempted product. Rule 6 is not applicable. [paras 5 & 6 of the decision]. 9. Dalmia Magnesite Corporation v. CCE - 2003 (107) ECR 298 (T-SZB) Furnace oil used as fuel in the manufacture of exempted intermediate product, demand of amount under Rule 57CC is not sustainable. 10. CCE v. Dharani Sugars & Chemicals - 2002 (102)....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....products and the erstwhile Rule 57CC or Rule 6 is not applicable [paras 3 & 5] 19. Sterlite Industries India Ltd. v. CCE - 2005 (191) E.L.T. 401 (T-Che.) Sulphuric acid emerging during manufacture of copper anode is a by-product. Even if the by-product emerging is exempted from duty, the Cenvat credit is not demandable as per Rule 57D. The benefit of Rule 57D cannot be taken away with the introduction of Rule 57AD/57CC or Rule 6 of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004. [para 29] 20. Narang Plastics Pvt. Ltd. v. CCE - 2006 (200) E.L.T. 548 (Tri.) = 2006 (134) ECR 449 (T.-Bang.) When the appellant had reversed credit on inputs, there is no requirement to insist on payment of 8% of the price of the exempted goods. 21. Jindal Vijayanagar Steel Limited v. CCE, Belgaum Final Order No. 1036/2006, dated 8-6-2006 passed by this Honourable bench in Appeal No. E/535/2005 in the appellant's own case. Non-granulated slag is a by-product emerging in the course of manufacture of HR Coils and the provisions of Rule 57CC or Rule 6(3) would not be applicable to by-products. Board Circular dated 3-4-2000 was relied on. [para-6] 22. Copies of permissions dated 19-1-2001 and 6....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....r. 12. The learned Counsel submits that the appellants' contention is that the item Corex Gas is a by-product. He submits that merely because they have filed declaration that by itself will not dis-entitle them from raising a plea that Corex Gas is by-product. The learned Counsel refers to the letter dated 19-1-2001 issued by the Ministry of Environment & Forests, Government of India, addressed to the appellants, who have considered the off gases from Corex plant to be treated as an Off gas. He further refers to the letter dated 6-3-1995 issued by the same Ministry treating the item to be an off gas. He submits that off gas has to be treated as a by-product in the light of the cited judgments. Since the judgments of Gas Authority of India Ltd; Hi-tech Carbon, Phillips Carbon Black Ltd. (cited supra), deals with the emergence of an off gas/slag/lean gas and the same has been treated as a by-product, therefore, the ratio of these three judgments would clearly apply to the facts of the case. It is his submission that the Ministry of Environment & Forests has accepted the proposition that the gas which arises in the manufacture of the final product is nothing but an 'off gas'. ....