1995 (11) TMI 155 - AT - Central Excise

Summary

Issues:
- Whether scrap was liable to excise duty under Tariff Item 27(a) at the relevant time.
- Whether the demand for the period September 1975 was barred by time under rule 10.

Analysis:
1. The appeal involved the question of whether scrap, specifically aluminum scrap, was subject to excise duty under Tariff Item 27(a) at the relevant time. The appellant argued that prior to 1981, scrap was not subject to excise duty under Tariff Item 27(a) as it stood. Reference was made to a decision by the Bombay High Court regarding a similar issue with copper scrap under Tariff Item 26A. The appellant contended that scrap, being a remnant or fragmentary portion arising as a result of the manufacturing process, should not be considered as "crude form" under the tariff. The appellant further argued that the demand for the period September 1975 was time-barred under rule 10.

2. The Revenue, represented by the learned SDR, reiterated the findings of the authorities below regarding the dutiability of the aluminum scrap in question. The Tribunal, comprising Members G.A. Brahma Deva and P.K. Kapoor, considered the submissions of both sides and examined the relevant facts and records. The Tribunal noted that the issue had been previously addressed by the Bombay High Court in cases related to copper scrap under Tariff Item 26A, which was analogous to the present case under Tariff Item 27(a) concerning aluminum in crude form.

3. The Tribunal, following the precedent set by the Bombay High Court, held that aluminum scrap was excisable under a different tariff item, namely Item 68, from March 1, 1975. It was concluded that prior to this date, aluminum scrap was not dutiable as there was no specific entry for it. The introduction of Item 68 clarified the dutiability of aluminum scrap. Additionally, the amendment of Tariff Item 27(a) further confirmed that waste and scrap were dutiable under Tariff Item 27(aa). As a result, the Tribunal disposed of the appeal in favor of the appellant, providing consequential relief.

In conclusion, the judgment clarified the dutiability of aluminum scrap under the relevant tariff items and relied on the interpretation of similar cases by the Bombay High Court to reach a decision in this appeal.