TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2017 (11) TMI 437
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ginal and rejected both the appeals filed by the company as well as General Manager. Briefly the facts of the present case are that the appellants are registered manufacturers of Sugar, molasses, Denatured Spirit, Ethanol and Fusel Oil falling under Ch 7 and 22 and availing cenvat credit on inputs, capital goods and input services. They are also having a co-generation plant for generating electric power which is used to meet the requirement of electricity of their sugar plant, Distillery, Residential colony etc. The electricity generated in excess of their requirement is sold to the State Grid, as per the power purchase agreement with KPTCL. On gathering intelligence that the assessee were not complying with the provision of Cenvat Credi....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....grieved by the said order, appellant filed two appeals before the Commissioner (Appeals) and both the appeals were disposed of by the common impugned order. Since the issue involved is common therefore both the appeals are being disposed of by this order. 2. Heard both the parties and perused the records. 3. Learned consultant for the appellant submitted that the impugned order is not sustainable in law as the same has been passed without considering the submissions of the appellant. He further submitted that the impugned order is contrary to the binding judicial precedent on the same issue. He further submitted that with reference to inputs and input services used in connection with the production of sugar, the adjudicating authority....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....question in fact with reference to the co-generated plant and the condition had been stipulated only on the percentage of units produced vis-`-vis unit consumed within the factory. The co-generation produces both electricity and steam. The steam is fully utilized in the factory of production. However the Department has taken an unjustifiable stand that the percentage of split ought to be on production of the electricity consumed within the factory and that quantum wheeled outside the factory. He further submitted that in fact the Rule refers to the percentage which can be determined only based on value and not on quantity. In support of his submission, he relied upon the decision in the case of DSM Sugar Mills Vs. CCE, Meerut reported in 20....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....he issue of show-cause notice and further a sum of Rs. 10,474/- (Rupees Ten Thousand Four Hundred and Seventy Four only) and a education cess of Rs. 860/- (Rupees Eight Hundred and Sixty only) has been reversed by the appellant. Further I find that in considering the explanation of the electricity used for sale to the Karnataka State Grid the unit produced was considered whereas it should be the value of sale and not the unit in question which should have been considered. Further I also find that the entire issue hinges on an error made on calculation and therefore appears to be a computation mistake which needs to be re-computed. In this regard it is pertinent to reproduce para 6.3 of the decision in the case of Sharad S.S.K. Ltd. cited su....