9911796707
TMI Blog1993 (8) TMI 163X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e arising in the course of production of acetylene gas. It was contended on behalf of the respondents that carbide sludge was not excisable. They also relied upon the decision reported in 1987 (30) E.L.T. 967, wherein it was held that carbide sludge is a waste product and is not goods under the Central Excise Act and hence not dutiable. Assistant Collector negatived the contention of the respondents holding that carbide sludge is an excisable commodity classifiable under Heading 3823.00 of the Schedule to the C.E.T., 1985 observing that decisions referred to by the assessee were delivered in the context of the old tariff (prior to 28-2-1986), whereas in the new tariff carbide sludge was specifically mentioned as a residuary product of the c ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hapter 3823.00 specifies residuary products of the chemical/allied industries not elsewhere specified or included . He contended that since carbide sludge being a residuary product of chemical or allied industries and it can be measured or weighed and also a marketable commodity it is classifiable under the Heading 38.23 of CET as excisable commodity. He also referred to the decision in the case of Khandelwal Metal and Engineering Works v. Union of India, reported in 1985 (20) E.L.T. 222 wherein the Supreme Court has held brass scrap as excisable even though it comes into existence as waste articles or rejected articles during the process of manufacturing that class of article and has a market. 3. Shri N. Mukherjee, learned Counsel for t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ls and for lining of sports/games courts but same was not substantiated. We also take note of the fact in the subsequent decisions with reference to the new tariff either of Sulphur Sludge in the case of South India Viscose Ltd. v. Collector of Central Excise - [1992 (57) E.L.T. 142] or of Carbide Sludge in the case of Collector of Central Excise, Hyderabad v. M/s. Indian Oxygen Ltd., as per its order 387/91-C, dated 26-4-1991, the Tribunal has held that it is only a waste and not excisable goods without going into the issue of marketability. With respect, that too in the facts and circumstances, we are of the view that this issue requires thorough examination. Since detailed examination is required with reference to name, character, use of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
