M/S. Kisan Sahkari Chini Mills vs None Appeared For The

Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal17 August 2015

CitationAppeal No. E/1658-1659/2006-EX(DB)

Ratio decidendi

The rule this decision rests on

Bagasse emerging as a waste product during the manufacture of sugar does not, by reason of its emergence and marketability alone, constitute goods manufactured in the course of any manufacturing activity, and is therefore not leviable to excise duty; the Tribunal, following the High Court's decision in Balrampur Chini Mills Ltd. v. Union of India, holds that a manufacturer is not liable to pay duty at 8% of the value of bagasse cleared by it where no manufacturing activity directed at producing bagasse is shown.

Written by Miss Lucy from the judgment below, not taken from a headnote.

Judgment

As delivered

IN THE CUSTOMS, EXCISE AND SERVICE TAXAPPELLATE TRIBUNAL, NEW DELHIPRINCIPAL BENCH, COURT NO. IIAppeal No. E/1658-1659/2006-EX(DB)

[Arising out of Order-in-Appeal No. 07&08-CE/06 dated 31.01.2006 by the Commissioner of Customs, Central Excise & Service Tax (Appeals), Lucknow].

For approval and signature:

Honble Shri Ashok Jindal, Member (Judicial)

Hon'ble Shri B. Ravichandran, Member (Technical)

1 Whether Press Reporters may be allowed to see the Order for publication as per Rule 27 of the CESTAT (Procedure) Rules, 1982?

2 Whether it should be released under Rule 27 of the CESTAT (Procedure) Rules, 1982 for publication in any authoritative report or not?

3 Whether Their Lordships wish to see the fair copy of the Order?

4 Whether Order is to be circulated to the Departmental authorities?

C.C. Lucknow .Respondent

Vs.

M/s. Kisan Sahkari Chini Mills .Appellants

Appearance:

Shri R.K. Grover, DR for the Appellant

None appeared for the Respondent

C.C. Lucknow .Respondent

Vs.

M/s. Nandganj Sihori Sugar Co. Ltd. .Appellants

Appearance:

Shri R.K. Grover, DR for the Appellant

Shri Mayank Garg, Advocate for the Respondent

CORAM:

Hon'ble Shri Ashok Jindal, Member (Judicial)

Hon'ble Shri B. Ravichandran, Member (Technical)

Date of Hearing: 17.08.2015

FINAL ORDER NO. 52606-52607/2015-EX(DB)

Per Ashok Jindal:

Revenue is in appeals against the impugned order.

2. The short issue involved in the matter is that whether the respondents are liable to pay duty on bagasse equal to 8% of value of the bagasse cleared by them which is emerging during the manufacturing of the final product by the respondent i.e. sugar and molasses.

3. Heard the parties.

4. Considering the fact that in the case of Balrampur Chini Mills Ltd. Vs. UOI-2014 (300) ELT 372 (All.) the Honble High Court has held that baggase emerging as waste product during the manufacturing of sugar is not manufactured as exempted goods. Though it is marketable but duty is not leviable thereon as there is no manufacturing activity. Relying on the decision in the case of Balrampur Chini Mills Ltd. (Supra) we hold that in this case also respondent are not liable to pay 8% duty of the value of bagasse cleared by them.

5. Consequently, we do not find any infirmity with the impugned orders. Same is upheld and appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed.

(Dictated and pronounced in the open court)

(B. Ravichandran) (Ashok Jindal) Member (Technical) Member (Judicial)

Bhanu

E/1658-1659/2006-EX(DB)

This page reproduces a public judgment and a summary of it. It is research material, not legal advice, and it is no substitute for advice from an advocate on your own facts.

Research this judgment with Miss Lucy

Ask what it holds, what has followed it, and what it means for your matter — in plain English, with the citations.

Try Miss Lucy free