9911796707
TMI Blog2013 (12) TMI 821X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... finition of excisable goods, which fall under sub-heading 7092 00 10 of the Central Excise Tariff, zinc dross was leviable to countervailing duty - Held that:- with the change in definition of excisable goods with effect from 10-5-2008; zinc dross would get covered as an excisable item falling under Chapter 79, attracting duty of excise and import of the same would call for confirmation of CVD. Fu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... dross is not excisable goods in terms of Hon'ble Supreme Court decision in the case of CCE v. Tata Iron and Steel Co. Ltd. reported in 2004 (165) E.L.T. 386. 2. However, subsequently it was noticed that the definition of excisable goods, as available under Section 2 of the Central Excise Act, 1944 was amended with effect from 10-5-2008 and sub-section (d) was introduced broadening the definition ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s not in accordance with the law. They have also submitted that the said zinc dross was to be used by the appellant in their factory located at Jammu & Kashmir where excise duty is exempted under Notification No. 56/2002. Inasmuch as no excise duty was payable by the appellants, the import of zinc dross would not attract any CVD. 4. The above pleas of the appellant do not stand accepted by Commis ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... and import of the same would call for confirmation of CVD. Further, the appellants plea that the said zinc dross was to be used in their factory located at J & K, where the same stand exempted does not appeal to the Bench at this stage, inasmuch as the levy of CVD cannot be dependent upon the area based exemption. Accordingly, taking into account the overall facts and circumstances of the case, w ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
