9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (3) TMI 638X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... old. But that is not the criterion. It cannot be said that dross and skimmings are the result of treatment, labour or manipulation whereby the end product is dross and skimmings. They are merely the scum thrown out in the process of manufacture of aluminium sheets. Therefore it cannot be said that dross and skimmings are transformation resulting in a new and different article with a distinctive name, character or use or that they ordinarily come to the market to be bought and sold and are known to the market, and duty cannot be levied - appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant. - E/55513/2013 - Final Order No: 60221/2017 - Dated:- 6-2-2017 - Mr. Ashok Jindal, Member (Judicial) and Mr. Devender Singh, Member (Judicial) Shri. Ma ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of Bombay observed as under: 21. We do not see how, in the light of these authoritative pronouncements of the Hon ble Supreme Court, can the Tribunal take a different view. When the Hon ble Supreme Court holds and as in Grasim Industries Ltd. (Supra) that the condition contemplated under section 2(d) and section 2(f) have to be satisfied conjunctively in order to entail imposition of excise duty under section 3 of the Act, then, we cannot agree with the Tribunal. The Larger bench decision does not take into account the fact that the authoritative pronouncement by the Supreme Court and repeatedly rendered is binding on it. That is law declared under Article 141 of the constitution of India. That it is rendered in the case of identical is ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... how the decision in the case of Grasim Industries Ltd. (supra) and particularly the above reproduced paragraphs could have been brushed aside by the Tribunal. The Honble Supreme Court listed the twin tests and which have to be satisfied before the goods can be said to be excisable to tax or Central Excise Duty. It is in these circumstances that the attempt of the Tribunal and which is supported before us by Mr. Sethna cannot be upheld. Each of these observations and from para 6.5 onwards run counter to the judgments of the Hon ble Supreme Court. 23. In para 6.9 the Tribunal takes assistance of a Supreme Court Judgment and concludes that the ratio of any decision can be applied only if the facts are identical. True it is that the Hon bl ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the Department cannot, in the light of these authoritative pronouncements, enable the Tribunal to deal with the matter afresh. However, Mr. Sethna, on instructions, states that the legal position and which has been consistently applied and followed by the Revenue is analysed in the circular. That having already been issued, the Board finds it unable to agree to any contrary suggestion. It is only thereafter that we are called upon to decide the matter. It is only to enable Mr. Sethna to take such instructions that the Judgment was not pronounced immediately. However, finding that the matter stands completely covered by the Judgments of the Hon ble Supreme Court and which have been totally disregarded by the Tribunal that we are unable to s ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
