1998 (9) TMI 262 - AT - Central Excise

Summary

Issues: Classification of broken Grinding Wheel under sub-heading 6801.90 of CET Act, 1985

Analysis:
The primary issue in this case revolves around the classification of broken Grinding Wheel under sub-heading 6801.90 of the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985. The appellant argues that the broken Grinding Wheel should not be classified as excisable goods as they are considered scrap and not marketable as Grinding Wheels. The appellant relies on various judgments and market enquiries to support their contention that the broken Grinding Wheels do not fall under any specific heading in the Tariff Act and should be deemed non-excisable. They cite precedents where waste and scrap have been held not to be excisable goods, emphasizing the marketability aspect in determining classification. The appellant requests the appeal to be allowed based on these arguments.

The Tribunal carefully considers the submissions and the precedents referenced by the appellant. It notes that waste and scrap have consistently been held not to be excisable goods in previous cases. The Range Officer's market enquiry confirms that the broken Grinding Wheels are not accepted as usable Grinding Wheels in the market, further supporting the appellant's argument. The Commissioner's reliance on Notification No. 234/82 to classify such waste products under Tariff Item 68 is challenged by the Tribunal. The Tribunal disagrees with the classification of broken Grinding Wheels as parts under the residuary Heading 6801.90, emphasizing the importance of marketability and the distinct nature of waste and scrap compared to the original product. The Tribunal concludes that the broken and defective Grinding Wheels, being waste and scrap, do not fit under any specific Tariff Heading and are therefore not excisable goods. Following the precedent set by previous judgments, the Tribunal sets aside the impugned order and allows the appeal in favor of the appellant.