2023 (8) TMI 557 - AT - Customs

Levy of additional duty of Customs (CVD) - Aluminium Used Beverage Can (UBC) scrap - manufactured goods or not - HELD THAT - Considering the facts that the respondents in their own case for the earlier import in COMMR. OF CUS. (PORT), KOLKATA VERSUS L. MADANLAL (ALUMINIUM) LTD. 2010 (6) TMI 426 - CESTAT, KOLKATA , this Tribunal has held that Aluminium Used Beverage Cans are not excisable, as these are not manufactured goods, the goods in question are not excisable and therefore, in view of the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Hyderabad Industries 1999 (5) TMI 29 - SUPREME COURT , additional duty not payable. As this Tribunal has taken the decision in the respondent s own case that the Aluminium Used Beverage Cans are not excisable as they are not manufactured goods. Therefore, Aluminium Used Beverage Cans in question are not excisable as these are not manufactured goods. Therefore, no CVD can be demanded from the respondent. There are no infirmity in the impugned order. Accordingly, the same is upheld - appeal of Revenue dismissed.

Summary

Issues:
The issues involved in the judgment are whether the imported Aluminium Used Beverage Can (UBC) scrap falls under the category of manufactured goods attracting additional Customs duty, and whether the demand of additional duty of Customs (CVD) from the respondent is justified.

Imported Aluminium Used Beverage Can (UBC) Scrap:
The respondents imported Aluminium Used Beverage Can (UBC) scrap as per ISRI specification TALDON for use as raw material in their factory. The Revenue demanded additional duty of Customs from the respondents, contending that the used Beverage Can scrap was subject to additional Customs duty. However, the ld. Commissioner (Appeals) set aside the order of adjudication for demanding additional duty of Customs (CVD) from the respondent. The Tribunal observed that the Aluminium Used Beverage Cans are not excisable as they are not manufactured goods, based on previous judicial pronouncements. Therefore, it was held that no CVD can be demanded from the respondent.

Revenue's Appeal:
The Revenue appealed against the order of the ld. Commissioner (Appeals) challenging the decision that no additional duty of Customs was leviable on the imported Aluminium Used Beverage Can scrap. The Tribunal, after considering the submissions and previous judicial decisions, upheld the decision that the Aluminium Used Beverage Cans in question are not excisable as they are not manufactured goods. Consequently, the impugned order was upheld, and the appeals filed by the Revenue were dismissed.

Conclusion:
In conclusion, the Appellate Tribunal CESTAT KOLKATA ruled in favor of the respondent, holding that the imported Aluminium Used Beverage Can scrap does not fall under the category of manufactured goods attracting additional Customs duty. The Tribunal based its decision on the fact that the Aluminium Used Beverage Cans are not excisable as they are not considered manufactured goods, as per previous judicial pronouncements. Therefore, the demand for additional duty of Customs from the respondent was deemed unjustified, and the appeals filed by the Revenue were dismissed.