Gujarat High Court
Commissioner Of Central Excise And ... vs Shree Sayan Vibhag Sahkari Khand Udyog ... on 13 January, 2015
Author: V.M.Sahai
Bench: Vijay Manohar Sahai, R.P.Dholaria
O/TAXAP/12/2015 ORDER
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
TAX APPEAL NO. 12 of 2015
TO
TAX APPEAL NO. 13 of 2015
================================================================
COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE AND CUSTOMS SURAT
II....Appellant(s)
Versus
SHREE SAYAN VIBHAG SAHKARI KHAND UDYOG MANDALI
LTD....Opponent(s)
================================================================
Appearance:
MR RJ OZA, ADVOCATE assisted by MS RUJUTA OZA, ADOVCATE for the
Appellant(s) No. 1
================================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE MR.
VIJAY MANOHAR SAHAI
and
HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.P.DHOLARIA
Date : 13/01/2015
COMMON ORAL ORDER
(PER : HONOURABLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE MR. VIJAY MANOHAR SAHAI) We have heard Mr.R.J.Oza, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Ms.Rujuta Oza, learned advocate for the appellant.
Learned Senior Counsel Mr.R.J.Oza, for the appellant submitted that the Tribunal, besides other judgments, has heavily relied on a judgment of the Allahabad High Court in the case of Balrampur Chini Mills Ltd. v. Union of India, 300 ELT 372, where under similar circumstances, the High Court had held that in the process of manufacturing sugar, the product bagasse which comes Page 1 of 2 O/TAXAP/12/2015 ORDER into existence though is marketable product being waste, it cannot be stated that the manufacturer manufactures such goods. The counsel submitted that the decision of the Allahabad High Court is carried further in appeal before the Supreme Court and the Department's appeal is admitted. Under the circumstances, both these Tax appeals are admitted for consideration of following substantial question flaw:
"Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal has committed substantial error of law in holding that the respondent is not obliged to follow provision of Rule 6(3) of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 for Cenvat Credit taken on common inputs/input serves used in the manufacture of dutiable excisable goods and, therefore, the revenue is not entitled to make recovery of duty under Rule 14 read with Rule 6(3)(i) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 with interest and levy of penalty under the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004?"
(V.M.SAHAI, ACJ.) (R.P.DHOLARIA,J.) Ashish Tripathi Page 2 of 2