2018 (11) TMI 1449

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....I), Chennai Zonal Unit, conducted detailed verification wherein they noticed that out of the two waste products i.e., Bagasse at the initial stage and press mud at the final stage; the press mud was cleared to their Distillery Division without payment of duty. DGCEI accordingly felt that since there was a cost attached to the waste press mud that was cleared out of the factory, whether waste or not, was liable to Excise Duty at the point of clearance from the factory. 1.3 This prompted the issuance of three Show Cause Notices/Statements of Demand (SODs) for various periods proposing to demand Central Excise Duty in the following manner: Sl. No. Appeal No. SOD & O/O No. & Date O/A No. & Date Duty & Penalty (in Rs.) Period 1. E/41850....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... Consultant submitted that the issue is covered by the Order of this very Bench of the CESTAT in the appellant's own case for an earlier period in Appeal No. E/40007/2013, wherein this Bench vide Final Order No. 42447/2018 dated 19.09.2018 has decided in favour of the appellants. 5. Per contra, Ld. AR heavily relied on the findings of the lower authorities, in particular, the insertion of Explanation 1 and Explanation 2 to Rule 6(3) of the CCR with effect from 01.03.2015. He contended that the amendment has changed the whole scenario and therefore the Order referred to supra is not applicable. He thus pleads that the impugned Order does not call for any interference. 6. I have considered the rival contentions, perused the documents place....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....goods which are chargeable to nil rate of duty and the goods used impliedly suggest a final product. Rule 2(h) of CCR, 2004 defines "final products" to mean excisable goods manufactured or produced from input or using input service. The CBEC Circular No. 1027/15/2016 CX which justified the continuance of Explanations 1 and 2 after the judgement of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Union of India and Ors Vs. M/s. DSCL Sugars Ltd. reported in 2015 (322) E.L.T. 769 (S.C.) had indicated the consequence, at paragraph 4.2, which reads as under: "4.2 Consequently, Bagasse, Dross and Skimmings of non-ferrous metals or any such by-product or waste, which are non-excisable goods and are cleared for a consideration from the factory need to be tre....