2019 (3) TMI 29

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....el products falling under Chapter 72 of the CETA, 1985 as well as Iron Pellets falling under Chapter 26 of the CETA, 1985. During the course of manufacture of the dutiable final products, by-products such as LD Slag and bi-Fuel Dust falling under Chapter Heading 2719 and Corex Sludge falling under Chapter Heading 2705 arise. Further, the allegation against the appellant that they have not followed Rule 6(1) or 6(2) of CCR, 2004 and therefore a SCN was issued for the period covering from March 2015 to November 2015 demanding 6% of the value amounting to Rs. 2,34,265/-. After following the due process, the Original Authority confirmed the demand and also imposed penalty of Rs. 23,427/-. Aggrieved by the said order, the appellant filed the app....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....roduct or waste emerges during the manufacture of final product, the entire inputs used in the manufacture of such final product should be treated as used only in the manufacture of said final product and no part of the inputs can be treated as used in the 'manufacture' of by-product/waste product. She further submitted that in the case of DSCL Sugar Ltd (supra), it has been held that bagasse emerging as agriculture waste is not the result of any manufacture. She further submitted that this issue is no more res integra and has been settled by various decisions of the Tribunal even for the period after 01.03.2015 wherein it has been held that Rule 6 of the CCR, 2004 shall not be applicable to by-products and/or waste products produced during....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ied in the present case. For this submission, she relied upon the following decisions: • Logic India Trading Co. Vs. Commr. of Customs, Cochin, 2016 (337) ELT 65 (Tri. Bang) Affirmed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in 2016 (342) ELT A34 (SC). • Commr. of C.Ex., Bhopal Vs. Minwool Rock Fibres Ltd., 2012 (278) ELT 581 (SC). 5. On the other hand, the Ld. AR defended the impugned order and submitted that the appellants have sold/cleared by-products such as LD Slag, Corex Sludge, BF Sludge for consideration to customers and such goods are non-excisable goods and therefore exempted goods as defined under Rule 6 (2) of CCR, 2004. He further submitted that as per the Board's Circular dated 25.04.2016, Rule 6 of CCR, 2004 i....