2017 (10) TMI 11 - AT - Central Excise

Waste - dutiability - plastic waste that arises during the recovery of metal scrap - Held that - If along with every manufactured item scrap is generated, then that scrap cannot be considered as manufactured item - the waste which gets generated in the facts of this case, is not excisable under any tariff heading, and remains un-contradicted by the Revenue in their appeals either before the adjudicating authority or before the 1st Appellate Authority or even before us - demand set aside - appeal dismissed - decided against Revenue.

Summary

Issues: Revenue's appeal against duty on plastic waste scrap generated during processing of imported/indigenous cable scrap.

In this case, the Revenue filed an appeal against an order-in-appeal dated 30.04.2008, concerning the duty on plastic waste scrap generated during the processing of cable scrap. The respondents procured imported/indigenous cable scrap, recovered scrap like copper wire, GS wire, and plastic scrap, on which duty was paid and CENVAT credit was availed. The dispute arose as the Revenue contended that duty should be paid on the plastic waste scrap as well. The adjudicating authority dropped the proceedings initiated by the show-cause notice, stating that the plastic waste scrap was not excisable. The 1st Appellate Authority upheld this decision, emphasizing that the waste scrap did not have a distinct identity in the trade parlance and was not excisable under any tariff heading. The Revenue's appeal did not effectively contest these findings, merely arguing that any waste generated during processing should be dutiable. The Tribunal concurred with the lower authorities, stating that the waste generated in this case was not excisable and rejected the appeal, as the Revenue failed to provide contrary evidence.

In conclusion, the Tribunal upheld the lower authorities' decisions, emphasizing that the waste generated during the processing of cable scrap, specifically the plastic waste scrap, was not excisable under any tariff heading. The Revenue's argument that any waste generated during processing should be dutiable was deemed weak and unsubstantiated. The Tribunal found no reason to interfere with the lower authorities' orders, as the Revenue failed to present any evidence contradicting the non-excisability of the waste scrap. The appeal was rejected based on the lack of merit in the Revenue's contentions and the correctness of the lower authorities' legal and factual findings.