2012 (8) TMI 1051

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... Mr. Sahab Singh, Member(Technical). Shri V.B. Gaikwad, Advocate for the Appellant. Smt. D.M. Durando, Dy. Commr.(A.R.) for the Respondent. ORDER Per : S.S. Kang Heard both sides. 2. The applicant filed this application for waiver of pre-deposit of dues. The appellant is engaged in the manufacture of sugar. For the manufacture of sugar the appellant are crushing sugarcane. Sugarc....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....stries Ltd. (supra) held that bagasse generated from the crushing of the sugarcane which is neither manufactured goods nor manufactured final product, but it is a residue/waste and the demand by invoking the provisions of Rule 6 of CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004 is not sustainable. Further, we find that the Tribunal in the case of Indian Potash Ltd. in Appeal No. E/2957/11 vide order dated 20.04.2012 a....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....h Pathak, AR and the Board Circular would not make any difference in the facts and, circumstances of the case. Moreover, neither the show-cause notice nor the impugned order in appeal mentions as to which common CENVAT credit availed inputs have been used in manufacture of sugar and molasses (dutiable final products) and bagasse (exempted final product). Since Bagasse emerges at sugarcane crushing....