2008 (3) TMI 596 - AT - Central Excise

Summary

Issues:
1. Claim of remission of excise duty on waste and scrap by the assessee.
2. Classification of waste products as dutiable and excisable.
3. Contradictory rulings by the Commissioner (Appeals) on the marketability of waste products.
4. Discrepancy in the treatment of used/burnt lubricating oil by the Commissioner (Appeals).

Analysis:

1. The appeal involved the claim of remission of excise duty on waste and scrap by the assessee, who was engaged in the manufacture of 'Empty Glass Bottles' and moulds for self-consumption. The assessee had filed applications claiming remission of duty on various waste products such as plastic film, plastic bags, waste paper, and lubricating oil arising during the manufacturing process.

2. The Commissioner (Appeals) had initially allowed the appeal filed by the assessee, stating that the waste products were not marketable and were different from goods referred in Rule 21 of the Central Excise Rules, 2001. However, in a previous case involving the same assessee, the waste products had been classified as dutiable and excisable as they were regularly sold by the assessee. The Tribunal had upheld this classification, leading to a contradiction in the rulings by the Commissioner (Appeals).

3. The Tribunal observed that the waste products in question had been held to be dutiable and excisable in the assessee's previous case, where they were deemed marketable and regularly sold by the assessee. Therefore, the impugned Order-in-Appeal, which contradicted the earlier ruling upheld by the Tribunal, was set aside, and the appeal filed by the Revenue was allowed. The Order of the Assistant Commissioner denying remission of duty was restored.

4. Regarding the used/burnt lubricating oil collected from different machines, the Tribunal noted a contradictory view taken by the Commissioner (Appeals) in another case involving a different assessee. In that case, the duty on used lubricating oil was upheld, contrary to the decision in the present impugned Order-in-Appeal. Consequently, the appeal filed by the Revenue concerning the treatment of used lubricating oil was also allowed, aligning with the decision in the previous case.

This detailed analysis highlights the key issues surrounding the classification and treatment of waste products for remission of excise duty, emphasizing the importance of consistency in legal interpretations and rulings across similar cases to ensure fair and just outcomes.