Wire and cable waste is not copper scrap merely because metal predominates; marketability remains essential for excisability.

End cuttings of wires and cables were not classifiable under Heading 74.04 as copper waste and scrap because no material showed them to be marketable unserviceable copper waste and scrap. The record indicated that the goods arose as waste and scrap in the manufacture of insulated wires and cables, and earlier decisions had already treated such wire and cable waste as not excisable. Classification could not rest on metal content alone, even where copper predominated by weight under Note 5 to Section XV. The settled position therefore excluded these end cuttings from excise duty as non-excisable goods.

---

---

Issues: Whether the end cuttings of wires and cables were classifiable under Heading 74.04 as copper waste and scrap and therefore exigible to duty.

Analysis: The demand proceeded on the premise that the end cuttings were copper waste and scrap falling under Heading 74.04 and that, applying Note 5 to Section XV, the metal content predominated by weight. However, no material was produced to show that the impugned goods were marketable unserviceable pieces of copper waste and scrap. The record showed that the goods were waste and scrap arising in the manufacture of insulated wires and cables, and the issue had already been settled by earlier decisions holding that waste and scrap of wires and cables is not excisable. The contention that classification could be made on the basis of metal content alone was rejected in light of the settled position.

Conclusion: The end cuttings of wires and cables were not liable to classification under Heading 74.04 as copper waste and scrap and were not excisable goods.

Ratio Decidendi: Waste and scrap arising from wires and cables, when not shown to be marketable copper waste and scrap, are not excisable merely because they contain metal content or because the metal predominates by weight.

---