2019 (3) TMI 1174

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... the respondents are engaged in the manufacture of pig iron and rolled steel bars and rods of alloy and non-alloy steels and are availing the credit of duty paid on input, capital goods and input services. During the internal audit, it was observed that during the course of manufacture of pig iron, granulated slag falling under Chapter 26 and mini blast furnace (MBF) falling under Chapter 2619.00 are generated. Granulated slag is cleared on payment of appropriate duty and MBF slag is cleared for some consideration without discharging the duty liability by claiming exemption under Notification No.4/2006-CE dated 1.3.2006. As no separate inventory of input and input service has been maintained in respect of the exempted goods and dutiable goo....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....d under heading 2619.00 of First Schedule to Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985 and rate of duty indicated against the entry in the Tariff is 12% , as such, it is exempted by Notification No.4/2006 dated 1.3.2006. 5. On the other hand, the learned counsel for the respondent-assessee submitted that the Commissioner (A) has set aside the Order-in-Original by relying upon various decisions of the Tribunal and the High Court which has settled the issue in favour of the assessee. He further submitted that this issue is no more res integra and has been settled in favour of the assessee by various decisions which are cited below: (i) UOI vs. Hindustan Zinc Ltd.: 2014 (303) ELT 321 (SC) (ii) Balrampur Chini Mills Ltd. vs. UOI: 2014 (300) ELT ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....f Rule 6 of CCR, 2004 are not attracted. In this regard, it is relevant to reproduce the findings of the Division Bench which is recorded in paragraphs 3 and 4 of the said order and the same is reproduced herein below: "3. We find that the issue is no more res integra. The Hon'ble High Court of Bombay in the case of Rallis India Ltd. vs. Union of India [2009 (233) E.L.T. 301 (Bom.)] has held that when common inputs or services are used in the manufacture of dutiable and exempted by-products, no liability to reverse a percentage amount of the waste exempted by-products would arise. Similarly, the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Commissioner of Central Excise vs. Gas Authority of India Ltd. [2008 (232) E.L.T. 7 (SC)] has conside....