K. RAVICHANDRABAABU, J.

1. In all these appeals, the issue involved are one and the same and common. It is represented by the learned counsels appearing in all these matters that the decision to be rendered in C.M.A.No. 2071 of 2005 will cover the other appeals. Therefore, the first case, viz., C.M.A.No. 2071 of 2005 is taken up for consideration.

2. The Revenue is on appeal against the final order passed by the CESTAT, South Zonal Bench, Chennai in No.1040 dated 1.12.2003.

3. Case of the Revenue:-

The first respondent is the manufacturer of Sugar, Molasses and Denatured Ethyl Alcohol. It was noticed by the preventive Officers that the first respondent manufactured Bio-compost fertiliser falling under Chapter Heading 3105.00 of the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985 and availed credit of duty on inputs viz., Molasses, Acetaldehyde, Benzene and Toluene, Tyridin, Light Taoutchocine, Sulphuric Acid, Chloroform and Methonol which are the common inputs for both Bio-compost fertiliser as well as Denatured Ethyl Alcohol. Bio-compost fertiliser is exempted from payment of duty vide Notification No. 8/96 dated 23.7.1996 etc., whereas Denatured Ethyl Alcohol is a dutiable product. Du