2019 (8) TMI 1844

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....nt Shri Santosh Kumar Agarwal, Authorised Representative for the Respondent JUDGEMENT PER: ARCHANA WADHWA The appellant has made a request to decide the matter in the light of decision of the Tribunal in the appellant's own sister concern involving an identical issue. Accordingly, I have heard learned A.R. appearing for the Revenue and have gone through the impugned order. 2. As per....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ed to pay a particular percentage of the value of the zinc scrap. 4. I find that the issue stands decided by the earlier decision of the Tribunal. Particular reference can be made to the Tribunal decision in the case of M/s APL Apollo Tubes Ltd. Final Order No.40925/2019 dated 12/07/2019 vide which an identical situation was considered by the Tribunal and the dispute was resolved in favour of t....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ppellants and which emerged in the process of manufacture cannot be considered as goods manufactured by the appellants. Thus, when the zinc scrap which is a waste arising out of process of manufacture of finished goods, is not goods manufactured by the appellant, the same cannot be considered as exempted goods manufactured by them. The Tribunal in the case of M/s. Bajaj Hindustan Sugar Ltd. vide F....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

...., 2019 it was observed as under:- "3. I have heard the learned Departmental Representative on behalf of the Revenue. The respondents were manufacturers of sugar and molasses. They were removing Bagasse and Press Mud. The period covered is from 1st March 2015 to 31st March 2016. In view of the amendment in explanation under sub-rule (1) of Rule 6 of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 w.e.f. 01.03.2....