2018 (12) TMI 780

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....cturing and clearing sun flower oil edible grade under brand name "Sun Shudh" and "Rashmi" without payment of duty claiming exemption under Notification No. 3/2006-CE dated 01.03.2006. The appellants have also been clearing by-products such as degrass residues resulting from the treatment of fatty substances or animal or vegetable waxes and soap stock, was, spent earth, fatty acid, sludge oil and gum falling under chapter heading 1522 of CETA, 1985 without payment of duty claiming benefit of Notification No. 89/1995-CE dated 18.05.1995. The appellants are also manufacturing Tin cans for packing edible oils. Therefore the Department has contended that as the appellants are manufacturing other excisable goods, they are not eligible for exempt....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....t's submission that the tins manufactured by the appellants are also exempted goods in terms of Notification No. 10/96-CE dated 23.07.1996. The Joint Commissioner, Bangalore vide is Order No. BLR-EXCUS-0004-JC-27-2016 dated 16.11.2016 held that the tins manufactured by the appellants are eligible for exemption under Notification No. 10/96-CE dated 23.07.1996. He also submitted that this Bench of the Tribunal vide Final Order No. 393/2017 in respect of N.K. Agro Oils Pvt. Ltd. has held that the appellants are eligible for exemption under Notification No. 89/95 and the facts of the case in the case of the appellant and M/s. N.K. Agro Oils Pvt. Ltd. are identical. 4. The learned AR has reiterated the findings of OIO and OIA. 5. Heard bot....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....idered as manufactured goods for excise levy based on the statutory definition for manufacture or should be considered as manufactured goods based on the likely value they may command while selling. We are clear that the value that a product may or may not fetch cannot be a determinative factor to decide whether the same is a manufactured final product/by-product or a waste/refuse arising during the course of manufacture of final products. This much is clear from the ratio of the Apex Court decision in Indian Aluminium Co. (supra). While no general guidelines can be laid down to decide when a product will be treated as a waste or a by-product, in the present set of facts the products under consideration are clearly not in the nature of by-p....