TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2017 (1) TMI 421
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....on appeal against the predecessor order, dropped proceedings against M/s Crescent Catalyst & Chemicals, M/s Lubrizol (I) Ltd and Shri Ajit V Mehta, Director in the former company. 2. The dispute pertains to valuation of the chemicals, calcium sulfonate and anti-oxidant additive , manufactured by M/s Crescent Catalyst & Chemicals out of waste filter cake , supplied by M/s Lubrizol India Ltd without any charge, and cleared to M/s Lubrizol India Ltd at the rate of Rs. 34.50 per kg quoted in the tender awarded to the former and on which duty liability was discharged. M/s Lubrizol India Ltd had been clearing the waste filter cake without discharge of duty liability by claiming it to be a non-excisable item but subsequently, upon advice from cen....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rder of the other Commissioner of Central Excise had decided upon the excisability of 'waste filter cake' , the impugned order found that the remand order of the Tribunal had not considered the irrelevance of classification of the input to the issue of valuation of the output calcium sulfonate and 'anti-oxidant additive' but went on to hold that the recovery of short levy on output, being exempted under notification no. 115/75-CE dated 30th April 1975 extended to solvent extraction industry, would not sustain. 5. Revenue challenges this order on the ground that the dropping is based on erroneous findings. Learned Authorized Representative argued each of the grounds of appeal and cited numerous decisions of High Courts and o....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....tion in the order impugned before us is no longer relevant. It may, therefore, be safely said that waste filter cakes are not excisable. Though this had been so stated by the adjudicating Commissioner, a closer perusal of the particular portion of the impugned order would show that the adjudicating authority did not find the finality of classification to be relevant for a decision on his part. In asserting thus, the adjudicating Commissioner may have been at variance with the observations of the Tribunal in remanding the matter but such an assertion is not liable to be held to the detriment of the impugned order in the absence of a challenge to the order on the specific ground of deviation from the terms of remand. The review committee has ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....icating authority had erred in travelling beyond the show cause notice to consider eligibility for exemption under notification no. 115/75-CE dated 30th April 1975. 8. Undoubtedly, the respondent has been paying duty without questioning the leviability of their output. Had they now sought a re-visit or had the adjudicating authority revisited this accepted position in the impugned proceedings, the thunderous protest of Revenue would have been justifiable. We do not find any contention of respondent seeking a reversal of that tax liability. In that context, neither the decision in re M/s Design Auto Systems Ltd and nor the one in re M/s Flock (India) Pvt Ltd assume any significance. We find that Revenue has misconstrued the context and inte....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ow cause notice to demand duty on capital goods lying in an authorized premises and, notwithstanding the magnanimity of that authority in allowing depreciation for computing the assessable value, that act was held to be invalid because the notice did not propose such action. It is a far cry from the situation before us. 11. Just as no law, instruction or judgement can prevent a tax collector from levying a tax in accordance with law, no law, instruction or judgement can be allowed to impede a tax collector from fulfilling his constitutional obligation to collect only such tax as is authorized by law. In the present situation, the collection of the duty thus far has been without authority of law; lack of procedural wherewithal may prevent r....