9911796707
TMI Blog2014 (3) TMI 196X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Lead, Un-wrought Lead, Lead Selenium Alloy, Arsenic Master Alloy, Lead Alloy with Antimony falling under sub-heading No. 7801.90 of the schedule of the Tariff Act, 1985. 3. The respondent purchased old and rejected batteries falling under Sub-heading No. 8507.00 from open market without payment of duty as well as from registered Central Excise assessee on payment of Central Excise duty as input to their final product i.e. Lead Ingots. The old and rejected batteries purchased from registered manufacturer are duty paid on which the appellants availed Cenvat credit under the provisions of erstwhile Central Excise Rules, 1944 and Cenvat credit Rules, 2001/2002, as the case may be at relevant point of time. The old and rejected batteries so pu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ng authority has confirmed the demand on the waste and scrap of plastics falling under chapter 39 of the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985, applying the Note No. 8 (a) of Section XV, whereas this note is applicable only for the goods falling under Chapter 72 to 83 and not on goods of chapter 39. I find that the issue of liability of Central Excise duty on waste and scrap arising out of dismantling of old and worn out machinery has been decided by the Hon'ble Tribunal in the case of CCE V/s. Vijay Rama Gajapathi Co-operative Sugar Ltd. reported in 2004 (63) RLT 61, whereas it has been held that the said order is impugned before us:- Manufacture - Section 2(f) of Central Excise Act, 1944 waste and scrap ar ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... LT 242 (Tri.- Chennai) 3. M/s. Mumbhi Kasari SSK Ltd. Vs Commissioner of Central Excise & Customs, Pune 2004 (173) ELT 61 (Tri. - Mumbai). 4. M/s. Birla Corporation Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise, Bhopal 2009 (236) ELT 476 (Tri.- Del.) 5. M/s. Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise, Visakhapatnam 2007 (79) RLT 374 (CESTAT-Ban.) 6. Commissioner of Central Excise, Visakhapatnam 2004 (63) RLT 6 (CESTAT-Ban.). 8. In all these cases it stands held that old waste and scrap generated through breaking of the capital goods or crushing or hammer of the same does not result in emergence of any excisable goods. In the case of Tudor India Ltd. referred supra, the dispute was in respect of plastic scrap gen ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
