2019 (7) TMI 1809

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... The facts of the case in brief are that the appellant M/s. Tirupati Sugar Ltd. are engaged in manufacture of sugar and molasses, classifiable under Chapter 17 of the Schedule to the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985. The appellant was made to deposit 5% of sale value of Baggase in terms of Rule 6(3) of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 on the pretext that the appellants did not maintain separate accounts/i....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....he refund claim of the appellant was rejected  on the ground that it was filed in pursuance to the judgement of Hon'ble Allahabad High Court (Lucknow Bench) in Civil misc. writ petition No, 11791 Of 2010 in the case of M/s. Balrampur Chini Mills Ltd. versus Union Of India wherein it was held that Baggase is not a manufactured product hence, Rule (2), Rule 6 (3) of CCR, 2004 is not applica....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....dingly, she upheld the  adjudication order and rejected the appeal. Hence, the present appeal before  the Tribunal. 2.  Heard both sides and perused the appeal records. 3.  I find that the facts of the present case are squarely covered by the  decisions cited supra. I also find that the issue is settled in view of the decision of Hon'ble High Court of Bombay in the c....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....issued to the respondents herein stating that Bagasse would be subject to duty under the Central Excise Act, 1944, as "other products". These show cause notices were issued to the respondents in terms of the provision contained in Rule 6(3) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 demanding various amounts. The said show cause notices were challenged by the respondents filing writ petitions in the High Co....