9911796707
TMI Blog2002 (4) TMI 596X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s from Order-in-Appeal No. 108/2000 (M-I), dated 20-10-2000 passed by the Commissioner (Appeals) by which the Commissioner (Appeals) has confirmed duty on spent sulphuric acid obtained out of concentrated sulphuric acid used as an input during the manufacture of chlorine. The same has arisen as waste during the process of the input and was held to be chargeable to duty under Rule 57F(18) of the C. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f sulphuric acid has not been ascertained by carrying out any test and hence it cannot be considered that the product in this case has high percentage of sulphuric acid. Therefore, the earlier judgments are distinguishable. He further submits that in the case of CCE, Ahmedabad v. Keti Chemicals reported in 1999 (113) E.L.T. 689, though the Larger Bench has held that spent sulphuric acid as a manuf ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed 26-2-96 has held that spent sulphuric acid is liable to duty in the light of the judgment of the Hon ble High Court of Allahabad in the case of Varuna Sulphonators Pvt. Ltd. v. UOI reported in 1993 (68) E.L.T. 42 (All.). In view of the above, the point raised by the appellants cannot be considered in view of the matter having reached finality in terms of the Larger Bench judgment (supra). Respe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
