2002 (1) TMI 480

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... [Order per : G.A. Brahma Deva, Member (J)]. These are two appeals filed by the Revenue with reference to respective impugned orders involving common issue. They are therefore taken together and being disposed of by this common order. 2. The short point to be considered in this case is whether the Respondent, M/s. Astra Idl Ltd., has to pay Central Excise duty or reverse Modvat credit on th .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... edings altogether mainly on the ground that the spent palladium admitted to be waste, are not excisable goods was not legal or proper. 3. Shri Rajesh Chander Kumar, learned Advocate appearing for the Respondents submitted that neither specific grounds were taken by the Department nor it was substantiated as to how the item is classifiable under Chapter 26. 4. We have carefully considered the .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ment has not come up with an acceptable evidence as to the classification of spent palladium. In the case of Mehta Vegetables Products v. CCE reported in [1997 (93) E.L.T. 229 (T)], the Hon ble Tribunal has held that Spent Earth and Spent Nickel catalyst emerging as residue do not arise out of manufacture and are not excisable goods in terms of Sec. 2(d), 2(f) and 3 of CEA, 1944. Since the investi .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X