9911796707
TMI Blog2000 (10) TMI 760X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... w cause notice was issued to them on 6-6-1991 raising the said demand of duty for the period from November, 1986 to March, 1990 on the ground that they had been clearing waste and scrap under the provisions of Rule 57F(2) to their job workers for conversion into wire rods and copper bars. It was alleged that their job workers have not sent back the waste and scrap arising at their premises, to the appellants. Accordingly, the demand was raised against them along with the proposal to impose personal penalty. Shri Chattopadhyay, learned Consultant draws our attention to the various annexures attached to the show cause notice and submits that though the show cause notice proposed confirmation of demand of duty only on the waste and scrap arisi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of PVC wires and cables is not an excisable commodity and as such, no duty was required to be paid on the same. In these circumstances, even if the Revenue s contention is accepted that job workers have not paid any duty on the waste and scrap on the PVC wires and cables and the same has also not been received by the appellants from their job workers premises, the confirmation of demand of duty on the same is neither justified nor warranted. 4. Shri Chattopadhyay, learned Consultant for the appellants also argues on the point of limitation. He submits that the show cause notice was issued on 6-6-1991 for the period from February, 1986 to March, 1990. The entire exercise of sending the goods to their job workers was done with the consent ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... their job workers under the provisions of Rule 57F(2) or to clear the same on payment of duty under Rule 57F(4). Inasmuch as the assessee has opted for clearance of waste and scrap under the provisions of Rule 57F(2) with due permission of their jurisdictional Central Excise Authorities, no demand of duty could be confirmed in respect of the same. 7. As regards the second portion, we find that the appellants, apart from taking a stand that the duty has been paid by their job workers, has also contended that in any case, the duty was not payable on waste and scrap of PVC wires and cables, in view of the Tribunal s decision in the case of Finolex Cables Ltd. v. C.C.Ex., Pune reported in 1996 (86) E.L.T. 418 (T) = 1995 (60) ECR 295 (T). The ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
