2002 (12) TMI 545

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... er : Justice K.K. Usha, President]. The only issue arising in this appeal at the instance of the assessee is whether it is entitled to the benefit of Notification No. 202/88, dated 20-5-88, as amended. Under the impugned order it was held that the appellant had used railways scrap in the manufacture of MS rods/bars which are to be treated as non-duty paid and, therefore, it is not entitled t .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... appellant would answer the description of the goods specified in Column (2) of the Table annexed to the Notification. The Supreme Court took the view that old and used railway material which were inputs would answer the description in Column (2), namely, angles, shapes and sections of iron of non-alloy steel (other than slotted angles and slotted channels). 3. Reliance was placed by the learned .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... otification 202/88. From the impugned order it is clear that no such attempt has been made by the Revenue. On the other hand, the Commissioner has assumed that rail cuttings/scrap purchased from the railway by the assessee are non-duty paid goods. The above finding cannot be sustained in the light of the decision of the Apex Court as well as the decision of the Allahabad High Court referred above. .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X