TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2023 (8) TMI 1137
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Learned Counsel, appearing on behalf of appellant at the outset submits that issue is no longer res-Integra as per the following Judgments: * Nk Proteins Limited Versus C.C.E. & S.T. - Ahmedabad-III 2023 (5) TMI 512 - CESTAT Ahmedabad * M/S Ricela Health Foods Ltd., M/S J.V.L. Agro Industrial Ltd., M/S Kissan Fats Limited Versus CCE, Chandigarh, Allahabad 2018 (2) TMI 1395 CESTAT New Delhi * Maheshwari Solvent Extraction Ltd. Versus Commissioner Of Central Excise, Nagpur, Maharashtra 2023 (5) TMI 1149 CESTAT Mumbai * Adani Wilmar Ltd - Order Dated 7-2-23 3. Shri Ashok Thanvi, Learned Superintendent (AR), appearing on behalf of the revenue reiterates the findings of the impugned order. 4. On careful consideration of submissions mad....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....not intentionally manufactured but only arise during the process of refining of crude vegetable oil and therefore should be considered as waste and they are entitled to the benefit of exemption notification 89/1995-CE. Respectfully following the decision of the Larger Bench, we hold that the impugned order is unsustainable and liable to be set aside and we do so. 9. The appeal is allowed and the impugned order is set aside. The same issue has been considered by CESTAT- New Delhi in the case of M/S. RICELA HEALTH FOODS LTD., M/S. J.V.L. AGRO INDUSTRIAL LTD., M/S. KISSAN FATS LIMITED (supra) wherein, the tribunal has observed as under:- 5. We have heard the learned counsels for the appellants. The learned counsels submitted on the pr....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s (supra) by dismissing the civil appeal will not form a binding precedent in view of similar dismissal of civil appeal against a contrary decision in Priyanka Refineries (supra). Thus, there exist two decisions of co-equal Benches on the same Issue. The Larger Bench of the Tribunal, now seized of the matter, should take a view which correctly reflects the legal position. Reliance was placed on the decision of Hon'ble Calcutta High Court In New India Assurance Co. Ltd. - AIR 2004 CAL 1. 7. The learned Counsel reiterated that the Larger Bench is deciding only on the reference made by the Excise Division Bench and, as such, the other connected disputes with reference to classification, valuation, Cenvat credit, penalty etc. would have t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....le Supreme Court in CCE vs. Indian Aluminium Company 2006 (203) E.L.T. 3 (S.C.) held zinc dross and flux skimming are not eligible to central excise duty. Relying on the earlier decisions in Union of India vs. Indian Aluminium Company Ltd. 1995 (77) E.L.T. 268 (S.C.) and CCE, Patna vs. Tata Iron & Steel Company Ltd.. - 2004 (165) E.L.T. 386 (S.C.), the Apex court held that the dross and skimming arising during the course of manufacture of metal cannot be subjected to excise levy only because it may have some saleable value, observing that the term "manufacture implies a change; every change, however, is not a manufacture". Every change of an article may be the result of treatment, labour and manipulation. The manufacture would Imply somethi....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....tion the same cannot be considered as waste. We are unable to accept such summary presumption. Admittedly, in chemical and metallurgical industry when the raw materials are processed with an intended purpose of manufacturing certain final products by a chemical reaction, refining, melting etc. multiple products will result. These products either emerged in the final stage or any of the intermediating stages also. The point for consideration is whether these are to be considered as manufactured goods for excise levy based on the statutory definition for manufacture or should be considered as manufactured goods based on the likely value they may command while selling. We are clear that the value that a product may or may not fetch cannot be a....