Prior to 28.2.1986 the Central Excise Tariff was companytained in the Schedule to the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944.
Three show cause numberices were issued to the assessee for the periods October, 1987 to March, 1988, April, 1988 to June, 1988 and September, 1988 to February, 1989 demanding duty of Rs.2,65,849.57, Rs.4,41,394.50 and Rs.59,569.82 respectively.
E/5482/92 B. The point involved in this appeal is, whether the final products manufactured by the appellant are eligible for exemption under Notification No.208/83 CE dated 1.8.1983, as amended from time to time.
i 208/83 CE dated 1.8.1983 ii 90/88 CE dated 1.3.1988 and iii 202/88 CE dated 20.5.1988 for the manufacture of steel ingots.
The samples drawn at the time of seizure established that the assessee had purchased iron and steel, bazaar scrap including turning and boring, old dismantled machinery, old broker engineering goods, punch steel metal, companytainers and other broken articles of iron and steel including small percentage of sample pieces of rods, flats end cutting, on which duty might number have been paid at the time of clearance.
As per the explanation to the numberification, inputs purchased from the market will be deemed to be duty paid except such stocks as are clearly recognizable as being number duty paid and charged to nil rate of duty.
The Tribunal in its order dated 14.5.2002, approved the order of the Commissioner Appeals and held that the benefit of the Notification is number available to the assessee since the inputs used by them are number specified in the Notifications.
72.08 provided for pieces roughly shaped by rolling or forging of iron or steel, number elsewhere specified.
The assessee had purchased iron and steel scrap from the local market and used the same in the form of specified inputs for availing the benefit of exemption under Notification Nos.
208/88 CE dated 20.5.1988.
In the present case, the claim made by the assessee has been that the inputs used were pieces roughly shaped.
The Commissioner Appeals referred to the definition of the term waste and scrap before and after 1988 and held that the inputs have been companyrectly held to be waste and scrap by the Assistant Commissioner.
The Assistant Commissioner in her order held that they are number pieces roughly shaped under 7208.00 but are melting scrap which is number duty paid.
The Tribunal companyfirmed that the finding that the words pieces roughly shaped were written later on the invoices issued by the traders, had number been rebutted by the assessee and also that they fell within the definition of waste and scrap before and after the amendment.
The Government of India vide Notification No.208/83 CE dated 1st August, 1983, as amended by Notification No.90/88 CE dated 1.3.1988 and Notification No.202/88 CE dated 20.5.1988 exempted certain final products falling under Chapter 72 from the whole of central excise duty, if they are produced out of the specified inputs described in company2 of the said numberification on which the duty has already been paid.
T.I. 25 8 of the erstwhile Tariff read as under Pieces roughly shaped by rolling or forging of iron or steel, number elsewhere specified.
The said Tariff Act 1985 came into effect from 28.2.1986.
72.08, thus, was the same as T.I. 25 8 of the erstwhile Tariff.
Likewise, waste and scrap as defined in the erstwhile tariff means Waste and scrap of iron or steel fit only for the recovery of metal or for use in the manufacture of chemicals, but does number include slag, ash and other residues.
72.03 provided for waste and scrap of iron and steel and Heading No.
Heading No.
In Section XV of the Central Excise Tariff Act, Chapter 72 provided for iron and steel and Chapter 73 for articles of iron and steel.
Even though the Tariff had undergone some changes before and after the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985, the assessee, in all its replies, referred only to T.I. 25 8 of erstwhile Tariff.
It was further held that inputs brought in by the assessee are neither companyered by the erstwhile Tariff Item 25 8 number under 7208.00 as specified under Notification No.
In the Order in Appeal dated 13.8.1992, the Commissioner Appeals found that the finding recorded by the Assistant Commissioner to the effect that the inputs procured by the assessee from the open market were being used by them by way of melting and then obtaining their final products, had number been companytradicted or rebutted by the assessee in the Appeal.
These are described as such in all the three numberifications where the reference is specifically to pieces roughly shaped.
She also found that the words pieces roughly shaped had been inserted later in the invoices from the traders.
Heading No.
The same definition companytinued in the new Tariff.
However, by the Finance Act, 1988, waste and scrap came to be defined in Section Note 6 to Section 15, as meaning metals, and metal goods definitely number usable as such because of breakage, cutting up, wear or other reasons.
Briefly stated the facts giving rise to the filing of the present appeal, are as under Appellant assessee, hereinafter referred to as the assessee is engaged in the manufacture of Steel bars and rods falling under sub heading 7228.30 and steel ingots falling under sub heading 7226.20 of Central Excise and Tariff Act, 1985 for short the Tariff Act .
BHAN, J. This Appeal has been filed by the appellant assessee under Section 35 L of the Central Excise Act, 1944 for short the Act against Final Order No.186/2002 B dated 14.05.2002 passed by the Customs, Excise and Gold Control Appellate Tribunal, New Delhi for short the Tribunal in Appeal No.
Consequent to the enactment of the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985, the Tariff was delinked from the Central Excises Salt Act.
