Crushing of defective cylinders is not manufacture when no mechanical working of metals or dutiable scrap arises.

Mere crushing or hammering of defective cylinders, without mechanical working of metals or generation of scrap in the course of manufacture, does not amount to manufacture under the Central Excise Tariff. Where no waste or scrap arises from a manufacturing process, Section Note 8(a) of Section XV read with Chapter Heading 72.04 is not attracted, and the resulting scrap is not dutiable. The cited authorities support that position, and the appeal succeeded.

---

---

Issues: Whether crushing and hammering of defective cylinders amounts to manufacture giving rise to dutiable waste and scrap under the Central Excise Tariff.

Analysis: The activity did not involve any mechanical working of metals on the cylinders. As no scrap arose in the course of manufacturing or mechanical working, the definition of waste and scrap under Section Note 8(a) of Section XV read with Chapter Heading 72.04 of the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985 was not attracted. The cited decisions supported the view that mere crushing and hammering of defective cylinders does not bring the activity within the charging entry.

Conclusion: The activity was not manufacture and the cylinders removed as scrap were not dutiable; the appeal succeeded.

Ratio Decidendi: Mere crushing or hammering of defective cylinders, without mechanical working of metals or generation of scrap in the course of manufacture, does not amount to manufacture or produce dutiable waste and scrap under the tariff entry.

---