Case Law Details
M/s IPF Vikram Sulphonation Limited Vs Commissioner of CGST, Central Excise (CESTAT Delhi)
The case of the Revenue is that the Spent Acid is an exempted goods, therefore, they are liable to pay an amount of equivalent 6% of the value of such Spent Acid in terms of Rule 6(3) of the CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004.
The facts of the case are not in dispute that the appellant is a manufacturer of Sulphonic Acid and during the course of the manufacturing of Sulphonic Acid, Spent Acid emerges. As the Spent Acid is not an exempted good, therefore, the provisions of Rule 6(3) of CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004 are not applicable to the facts of the case as held by this Tribunal in the case of Dharamsi Morarji Chemicals Co. Ltd. vs. Commissioner of C. Ex. Raigad, 2010 (255) ELT 314 (Tri.-Mum). Therefore, the demand against the appellant is not sustainable, accordingly, the same is not sustainable.
FULL TEXT OF THE CESTAT DELHI ORDER
1. The appellant is in appeal against the impugned order wherein an amount equal to 6% of the value of the goods cleared by them is demanded as exempted goods.
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
