Just a moment...

Report
FeedbackReport
Bars
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Feedback/Report an Error
Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
TMI Blog
Home / RSS

2017 (7) TMI 452

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....Dated:- 4-7-2017<br>E/1691-1697/2008, E/1700/2008 & E/2054/2008 - A/61246-61254/2017-EX[DB]<br>Central Excise<br>Mr. Ashok Jindal, Member (Judicial) And Mr. Devender Singh, Member (Technical) Shri. B.L. Narasimhan Kumar, Shri. Amrinder Singh, Shri. Rishabh Kapoor, Advocates- for the appellant Shri. G.M. Sharma, AR- for the respondent ORDER Per: Ashok Jindal The appellants are in appeal agains....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ecycled to attain economic efficiencies. After they can no longer be used in the process of manufacture of bulk drugs, they are used in their boilers as incinerators as they have a high calorific value. Only those solvents are recycled which are water insoluble. Due to the water content and other chemicals, the waste solvents are not suitable for use in the boilers and are disposed of /sold by the....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....onfirmed. Consequently, the demand of duty was confirmed of the main appellant and penalties were imposed on the co-appellants. Aggrieved from the said order, the appellants are before us. 3. The ld. Counsel appearing on behalf of the appellants submit that the solvents sold by them are not excisable in terms of the decision of this Tribunal in the case of Aurobindo Pharma Ltd. reported in 2010 (....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... 06.02.2017, the cenvat credit cannot be denied. 5. The Ld. AR opposed the contention of ld. Counsel saying that the ld. Adjudicating Authority has not examined the issue of excisability, therefore,&nbsp; the matter is required to be go back to the adjudicating authority, first to decide the issue of excisability then come to the question of clandestine removal/undervaluation. 6. Heard both side....