TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2026 (1) TMI 848
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... 01.01.2013 to 30.09.2013 01.10.2013 to 31.03.2014 01.01.2013 to 30.09.2013 01.10.2013 to 31.03.2014 SCN dated 26.03.2014 11.08.2014 26.03.2014 11.08.2014 OIO dated 04.06.2014 29.10.2014 02.06.2014 29.10.2014 OIA dated 27.10.2014 06.05.2015 28.10.2014 06.05.2015 Refund Rs.80,56,172 Rs.69,04,265 Rs.6,20,31,787 Rs.3,85,89,406 Since, the issue involved in all these four appeals is identical, therefore, all appeals are taken up together for the purpose of discussion and decisions. For the sake of convenience, we are taking Appeal No. 'E/52851/2015' as a lead case. 2. Briefly stated facts of the present case are that the Respondents were engaged in manufacture of Refined Bran Oil falling under sub-heading 15159040 of the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985, which is exempted from payment of duty vide Notification No. 03/2006-CE dated 01.03.2006. During the process of manufacturing of Refined Bran Oil, certain by-products namely Fatty Acids, Gums & Waxes were generated. For the period October 2013 to March 2014, the Respondents had paid duty though under protest on the clearance of Fatty Acids, Gums & Waxes on the ple....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....er - [2014 (300) ELT A74 (SC)]. He further submits that the Commissioner (Appeals) has not considered the binding nature of the said order and relied upon the other decisions of the Tribunal and Courts to allow the refund to the Respondents. 5. On the other hand, the learned Counsel for the Respondents submits that the issue involved in the present case has an historical background; the Revenue across the entire industry for various assessees, contended that by-products are manufactured goods and hence, are liable to excise duty since they have distinct commercial identity and value. 5.1 She further submits that the department agitated the issue before the Tribunal, wherein the Tribunal in the case of CCE vs. Priyanka Refineries Ltd - [2010 (249) ELT 70 (Tribunal)] held that the soap stock arising during manufacture of refined edible oil is considered to be "waste" and not a "by-product", hence, is exempted under Notification No. 89/95-CE dated 18.05.1995. She further submits that the said decision of the Tribunal was affirmed by the Hon'ble Apex Court vide its Order dated 07.01.2010 reported as 2011 (274) ELT A16 (SC). 5.2 She further submits that this issue again reached....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ts that the same position has also been further confirmed by the Tribunal in the Respondents' own case in Ricela Health Foods Ltd vs. CCE - [2020 (372) ELT 142 (Tri. Chan.)]. She also submits that in view of the settled position of law, the Tribunal and High Court in the following cases, have held that the products, generated during manufacture of final product, shall be exempted from payment of excise duty being "waste" under Notification No. 89/95-CE dated 18.05.1995: * Commr of CGST, Chennai Outer vs. D. Ramamurthy, SSD Oil Mills Company Ltd - [2021 (12) TMI 478 Madras High Court] * M/s Raj Agro Mills Ltd vs. CCE, Ludhiana - [2025 (6) TMI 427 CESTAT Chandigarh] * M/s Dhillon Oil & Fats Pvt Ltd, M/s Tara Health Foods Limited vs. CCE, Chandigarh-II - [2023 (12) TMI 1445 CESTAT Chandigarh] * M/s Kissan Fats Ltd, M/s BCL Industries & Infrastructure Ltd, M/s Sangrur Agro Ltd vs. CCE, Chandigarh-II - [2023 (9) TMI 914 CESTAT Chandigarh] * CCE, Ludhiana vs. Shree Jindal Proteins Ltd, M/s Sangrur Agro Ltd - [2018 (3) TMI 915 CESTAT Chandigarh] 5.6 She also submits that the impugned products are exempted from levy of excise duty under the N....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....2013 (294) ELT 156 (Tri. Ahmd.)] * M/s Savita Oil Technologies Ltd vs. CCE, Belapur - [2023 (2) TMI 1225 CESTAT Mumbai] * CCE & ST, Rohtak vs. Saint Gobain Gyproc India Ltd - [2017 (4) TMI 851 P&H High Court] * National Steel Agro Industries Ltd vs. CC (Import), Mumbai - [2020 (371) ELT 551 (Tri. Mumbai)] * CC, New Delhi vs. Organan India Ltd - [2008 (231) ELT 201 (SC)] * Man Truck & Bus India P Ltd vs. CCE, Indore - [2021 (375) ELT 590 (Tri. Del.)] * CCE, Coimbatore vs. El P Em Industries - [2017 (356) ELT 565 (Mad.)] 6. We have considered the submissions made by both the parties and perused the material on record as well as various decisions relied upon by both the sides. We find that the only issue involved in these appeals is whether the denial of refund claims of the duty paid on clearance of Fatty Acids, Gums & Waxes, generated as waste products during the manufacture of Refined Rice Bran Oil is justified or not? 7. We also find that the only ground raised by the Revenue in the grounds of appeal is that this issue has been decided by the Tribunal in favour of the department in the case of CCE vs. A.G. Fats Ltd & othe....