9911796707
TMI Blog2023 (5) TMI 1076X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... le Supreme Court in the case of COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE VERSUS WEST COAST INDUSTRIAL GASES LTD. [ 2003 (4) TMI 110 - SUPREME COURT ] read with Board s Circular No. 721/37/2003- CX., dated 6-6-2003. Following the said decision of the Hon ble Supreme Court and the circular, I dismiss the appeal of the Revenue. In case of PANASONIC CARBON INDIA CO. LTD. VERSUS COMMISSIONER OF C. EX., GUNTUR [ 2006 (7) TMI 88 - CESTAT,BANGALORE] , it was held that all the items which were cleared are not dutiable. They were cleared from the workshop of the factory as Waste and Scrap on account of its wear and tear. There are no merits in the impugned order setting aside the same - Appeals are allowed. X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ufacturer of cement and avail Cenvat credit of duty paid on inputs & capital goods under Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004. During the disputed period appellant cleared scrap of TOR steel and waste & scrap of PP wrapper, PP/HDPE bags, scrap of grinding material & waste and scrap of cable & mixed waste and scrap. 2.2 Show cause notices were issued to the appellant remanding duty on clearance of various types of waste and scrap under Rule 3 (5A) of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004. 2.3 The show cause notices were confirmed by the adjudicating authority and the appeals filed against the set order-in-original has been dismissed as Commissioner (Appeal). 3.1 We have heard Shri Rajesh Ostwal, Advocate along with Ms. Hanisha Jatania, Chartered Accountant, for ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d in 1998 (100) ELT 517 (T) Affirmed in 2002 (146) ELT A100 (S.C) CCE Vs. J.K. Industries reported in 2004 (164) ELT 332 (T) Ahmedabad Electricity Co. Ltd., reported in 2003 (158) ELT 3 (SC) 3.5 Learned AR reiterates the findings recorded in the impugned order. 4.1 We have considered the impugned order along with the submissions made during the course of arguments. We find that the issue is no longer resintegra. In the Appellant's own case the issue has been settled under the decisions referred by the Learned counsel. We reproduce the observations made in the decision of 2015 wherein following has been held: 'CCE Vs. Ambuja Cements Ltd. - 2015 (10) TMI 1781 - CESTAT MUMBAI "5. The learned counsel for the respondent-assess ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the item cleared. a) Drums, Containers, Barrels & HDPE bags in which inputs are received (i) CBEC Circular Nos. 721/37/2003-CX, dated 6-6-2003 & 449/15/99-CX, dated 23-3-1999. (ii) West Coast Industrial Gases Ltd. v. CCE [1999 (108) E.L.T. 383] affirmed by the Apex Court in CCE v. West Coast Industrial Gases Ltd. [2003 (155) E.L.T. 11 (S.C.)] (iii) IOL Ltd. v. Collector [1993 (68) E.L.T. 624] (iv) Castrol India Ltd. v. CCE [1998 (99) E.L.T. 234] b) Fire Bricks and grinding wheels (capital goods) due to wear & tear (i) Larsen & Toubro Ltd. v. CCE [2004 (173) E.L.T. 515] (ii) CCE v. Birla Corporation [2005 (181) ELT. 263] (iii) Birla Corporation v. CCE [2003 (162) ELT. 499] c) Coal/Black Powder (Floor Sweepings) ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of cuttings. It was held that this was not eligible to tax even though the waste may have some saleable value. The essential reason for this was that there was no transformation in the case of waste/scrap to a new and different article. No new substance having a distinct name, character and use was brought about. Manufacturing process involved treatment, labour or manipulation by the manufacturer resulting in a new and different article. It requires a deliberate skillful manipulation of the inputs or the raw materials. This was not so in case of scrap. ● From the above discussion it is clear that to be subjected to levy of excise duty 'excisable goods' must be produced or manufactured in India. For being produced and manufa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
