The Ugar Sugar Works Ltd vs Commissioner Of Central Excise, ...
- CitationAppeal No. 53-2012
Ratio decidendi
The rule this decision rests on
The Tribunal follows the decision of the Allahabad High Court in Balrampur Chini Mills Ltd. v. Union of India, holding that the issue is no longer res integra; applying that decision, a manufacturer of sugar is not under a legal obligation, in respect of input services used in the manufacture of sugar which also yield bagasse as a by-product used as boiler fuel, either to reverse CENVAT credit or to pay an amount under Rule 6 of the CENVAT Credit Rules, and the Board Circular No. 904/24/2009-CX dated 28.10.2009 requiring such reversal or payment, having been quashed by that High Court, cannot be relied upon to require it.
Written by Miss Lucy from the judgment below, not taken from a headnote.
Judgment
As delivered
[Arising out of Order-in-Appeal No. 53-2012 dated 02/02/2012 passed by CCE(Appeals), Mangalore]
[Arising out of Order-in-Appeal No. 14-2012 dated 29/03/2012 passed by CC,CE&ST, GUNTUR( Appeal) ]
For approval and signature:
HON'BLE SMT. ARCHANA WADHWA, JUDICIAL MEMBER
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?
THE UGAR SUGAR WORKS LTD UGAR KHURD 591 316, DIST BELGAUM,KARNATAKA Appellant(s)
The Chittoor Co Operative Sugars Ltd Tirupathi Road, Chittor Chittor Dist, Ap Appellant(s)
Versus
Commissioner of Central Excise, Customs and Service Tax BELGAUM NULL NO. 71...CLUB ROAD, CENTRAL EXCISE BUILDING, BELGAUM, - 590001 KARNATAKA Respondent(s)
Commissioner of Central Excise,Customs & Service Tax Tirupati 9/86-A...BEHIND WEST CHURCH COMPOUND, AMARAVATHI NAGAR, M.R.PALLI, - 517502 AP Respondent(s)
Appearance:
None For the Appellants
Shri S. Teli, Deputy Commissioner(AR) For the Respondent
Date of Hearing: 29/05/2015
Date of Decision: 29/05/2015
CORAM:
HON'BLE SMT. ARCHANA WADHWA, JUDICIAL MEMBER
Final Order No. 21215-21216 / 2015
Per : ARCHANA WADHWA
Nobody appeared. Accordingly I have heard learned AR and have gone through the impugned orders.
2. The issue involved in the present appeal is as to whether the appellant is under a legal obligation to either reverse the CENVAT credit or to pay an amount in terms of the provisions of Rule 6 of the CENVAT Credit Rules in respect of services utilised for the manufacturer of the sugar, which have also resulted in emergence of bagasse as a waste product, which was further used as fuel to generate steam in boilers.
3. I find that the issues are no more res integra in terms of the decision of the Honble Allahabad High Court in the case of Balrampur Chini Mills Ltd. Vs. UOI [2014(300) ELT 372 (All.)], wherein the Boards Circular No.904/24/2009-CX dt. 28/10/2009, requiring reversal of credit or payment of an amount in terms of Rule 6 stand quashed. By following the same, I set aside the impugned orders and allow both the appeals with consequential relief to the appellants. (Operative part of this order pronounced in court)
ARCHANA WADHWA JUDICIAL MEMBER
Raja.
3
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