2013 (12) TMI 859

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....n Ore fines are classifiable under sub-heading 26011120 of the Tariff while the Iron ore lumps are classifiable under heading 26011110. According to the department, Iron Ore fines are fully exempt from duty and the same were being cleared by the respondent without payment of duty. According to the department since common inputs/output service have been used for the manufacture of dutiable as well as exempted final product and cenvat credit has been availed in respect of such common inputs/input services and since separate account and inventory of such input/ services used in the manufacture of dutiable and exempted final products has not been maintained, Rule 6(3) would become applicable. On this basis, the department by issue of show cause....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....oducts- Iron Ore Fines, and since separate account and inventory as per provisions of Rule 6(2) have not been maintained, the provisions of Rule 6(3) would become applicable, and that the Commissioner (Appeals)'s order setting aside the demand under Rule 6(3) is incorrect, as he has wrongly held that Iron Ore Fines is not a manufactured product. He, therefore, pleaded that the impugned order is not sustainable 4. Shri J. M. Sharma, ld. Counsel for the respondent, pleaded that Iron Ore Fines is not a manufactured product and hence not excisable product. In this regard he relied upon the judgment of the Tribunal in the case of CCE, Raipur Vs. Devi Iron & Power Ltd. reported in 2013 (287) ELT 494 (Tribunal-Delhi) and also Final Order No.1474 ....