2022 (2) TMI 617

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... separate accounts for the receipt, consumption and inventory of inputs meant for use in the manufacture of both dutiable and exempted final products so as to restrict the cenvat credit availed only to the proportionate quantity of inputs used in the dutiable final products. Neither had they paid an amount equal to 6% / 7% of the value of the exempted final product for their clearances made during the period from 01.12.2014 to 30.06.2015. Show cause notice was issued proposing to recover the wrongly availed cenvat credit in terms of Rule 6 (3) and Rule 14 of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 read with Section 11A (1) of Central Excise Act, 1944 along with interest and also proposing to impose penalties. After due process of law, the original author....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....g process involved and that Rule 6 of CCR 2004 is not applicable. 4. He submitted that Hon'ble Allahabad High Court in the case of Balrampur Chini Mills Ltd. Vs UOI - 2019 (5) TMI 972 has held that Bagasse cannot be considered as final product consciously manufactured by an assessee. 5. In the case of Arignar Ana Sugar Mills Vs CGST & CE Tiruchirapalli 2019 (8) TMI 419 CESTAT Chennai, similar view was taken. He prayed that the appeal may be allowed. 6. Ld. A.R Shri Arul C. Durairaj appeared for the department. He supported the impugned order. 7. Heard both sides. 8. The issue to be decided is whether the appellants are liable to pay 6% / 7% of the value of Bagasse sold by them for consideration. 9. The Hon'ble Supreme Cour....