1992 (9) TMI 225 - AT - Central Excise

Summary

Issues:
1. Appeal against the order of the Collector of Central Excise (Appeals) regarding duty on Silicon Steel Scrap.
2. Interpretation of Trade Notice allowing removal of Aluminium scrap without duty payment.
3. Applicability of Board's instructions to Silicon Steel Scrap.
4. Comparison with previous cases involving clearance of different types of scrap.
5. Analysis of Rule 57F(4)(b) regarding duty-free clearance of scrap.
6. Consideration of specific exemptions for different types of scrap.
7. Decision on the maintainability of the Collector (Appeals) order.

Analysis:
The appeal was filed by the Revenue against the order of the Collector of Central Excise (Appeals) concerning the duty demand on Silicon Steel Scrap removed for re-melting and conversion into steel ingots. The lower appellate authority set aside the duty demand based on a Trade Notice allowing Aluminium scrap removal without duty payment. The Revenue argued that the Trade Notice's applicability is limited to Aluminium scrap and cannot be extended to other types of scrap. The Respondents contended that the Board's rationale in the Trade Notice should apply to Silicon Steel Scrap as well.

In a previous case, it was established that Rule 57F(4)(b) mandates duty payment unless specific exemptions exist. The Board's instructions only covered Aluminium scrap, not other types like Copper scrap. The Tribunal ruled that the duty-free clearance of scrap under Rule 57F(4)(b) is subject to specific government orders. As no such orders existed for Copper scrap, the Collector (Appeals) decision on allowing duty-free clearance akin to Aluminium scrap was deemed incorrect. The Tribunal emphasized that the Board's instructions apply only to Aluminium scrap, not Copper scrap, under the Modvat Scheme.

Based on precedent, the Tribunal held the Collector (Appeals) order as not maintainable. The appeal by the Revenue was allowed, overturning the lower appellate authority's decision. The ruling clarified that duty-free clearance under Rule 57F(4)(b) is contingent on specific government instructions, which, in this case, did not extend to Copper scrap. The decision reaffirmed the need for distinct treatment of different types of scrap under the Modvat Scheme.