Custom, Excise & Service Tax Tribunal
M/S Dscl Sugar vs Commissioner Of Central Excise, ... on 7 October, 2016
IN THE CUSTOMS, EXCISE & SERVICE TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL REGIONAL BENCH : ALLAHABAD COURT No. 2 APPEAL No. E/1201/2011-EX[SM] (Arising out of Order-in-Appeal No. 19-CE/LKO/2011 dated 22/02/2011 passed by Commissioner of Central Excise & Customs (Appeals), Lucknow) For approval and signature: Honble Mr. Anil G. Shakkarwar, Member (Technical) ======================================================
1. Whether Press Reporter may be allowed to see the Order for publication as per Rule 27 of the CESTAT (Procedure) Rules, 1982? No
2. Whether it would be released under Rule 27 of the CESTAT (Procedure) Rules, 1982 for publication in any authoritative report or not? Yes
3. Whether their Lordships wish to see the fair copy of the order? Seen
4. Whether order is to be circulated to the Department Authorities? Yes ====================================================== M/s DSCL Sugar Appellant Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise, Lucknow Respondent Appearance:
Shri Ashish Vaish, Chartered Accountant, for Appellant Shri D.K. Deb, Assistant Commissioner (AR), for Respondent CORAM:
Honble Mr. Anil G. Shakkarwar, Member (Technical) Date of Hearing & Date of Decision : 07/10/2010 FINAL ORDER NO. 70975/2016 Per: Anil G. Shakkarwar The present appeal is filed by, M/s DSCL Sugar, against Order-in-Appeal No. 19-CE/LKO/2011 dated 22/02/2011 passed by Commissioner of Central Excise & Customs (Appeals), Lucknow.
2. Heard the parties.
3. The appellants were issued with Show Cause Notice for recovery of amount under Rule 6 (3) of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 on Bagasse for the period from December, 2008 to March, 2009. I find that said issue is covered by Ruling of Honble Supreme Court in appellants own case in the case of Union of India Versus DSCL Sugar Ltd. reported at 2015 (322) E.L.T. 769 (S.C.). The Honble Supreme Court has held in the said case law that Bagasse is not excisable and that Rule 6 (3) of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 is not applicable to Bagasse. I, therefore, allow the appeal. The appellant shall be entitled for consequential relief, if any, in accordance with law.
(Dictated and pronounced in Court) Sd/-
(Anil G. Shakkarwar) Member (Technical) Ansari 1 2 Ex Appeal No. 1201/11