Case Law Details
M/s Ricela Health Foods Ltd. Vs CCE (CESTAT Delhi)
The process of manufacturing refined vegetable oil is essentially by removing the unwanted materials that were present in the crude vegetable oil so that a refined vegetable oil can be obtained. In this process of refining, the unwanted materials are removed. Hence, we are of the considered view that the removal of unwanted materials resulting in products like gums, waxes and fatty acid with odour cannot be called as a process of manufacture of these gums, waxes and fatty acid with odour. The process of manufacture is for refined rice bran oil. As such, we note that these incidental products are nothing but waste arising during course of refining of rice bran oil and applying the ratio of Apex court, as discussed above, these cannot be considered as manufactured excisable goods. Noting that the reference is to decide whether these are to be treated as waste for the purpose of exemption Notification 89/95-CE we note though the excisability of the product itself is seriously in dispute as per the opinion expressed by us, as above, these cannot be considered as anything other than waste and as such will be covered by the exemption Notification No. 89/95-CE.
FULL TEXT OF THE CESTAT ORDER IS AS FOLLOWS:-
The Central Excise Division Bench of the Tribunal while considering the appeals Nos. 653/2012 and 3585/2012 filed by M/s Ricela Health Foods Ltd. and M/s J.V.L. Agro Industrial Ltd., noticing conflicting judgments of two coordinate benches on the same dispute, framed the following reference to be considered and decided by a Larger Bench of this Tribunal :-
“Whether fatty acids, wax and gum arising in course of manufacture of refined vegetable oil are to be treated as “waste” for the purpose of exemption Notification No. 89/95-CE and would be exempt from duty under this notification and whether in this regard, the Apex Court’s order affirming the Tribunal’s judgment in the case of CCE, Jalandhar vs. A.G. Fats Ltd. (supra) by dismissing the civil appeal filed against the Tribunal’s judgment, would be a binding precedent ”.
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
