2004 (11) TMI 370 - AT - Central Excise

Tribunal Grants Waiver for 'Red Mud' Duty, Citing Precedent

The Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellants regarding the classification of 'Red Mud' as an excisable item under the CETA Schedule. Despite the original ... Stay/Dispensation of pre-deposit - Demand Issues Involved:Classification of 'Red Mud' as excisable item under CETA Schedule, imposition of duty, penalty, appeal for waiver of predeposit and stay of recovery.Classification of 'Red Mud' as excisable item:The original authority confirmed a duty demand against the assessee for 'Red Mud' under sub-heading No. 2621.00 of the CETA Schedule at 16% ad valorem. The first appellate authority upheld this classification and demand, despite the appellant's argument that 'Red Mud' was waste material generated during the manufacture of final products and not a distinct marketable commodity. Reference was made to a similar case where 'spent earth' was held not marketable and hence not excisable. The JDR supported the authorities' findings. The Tribunal found a parallel with the precedent case and granted waiver and stay of recovery, acknowledging a prima facie case for the appellants.Imposition of penalty:The original authority imposed a penalty on the assessee, which was set aside by the first appellate authority. The penalty issue was not specifically addressed in the Tribunal's judgment, as the focus was on the classification and duty demands related to 'Red Mud.'Appeal for waiver of predeposit and stay of recovery:The appellants sought waiver of predeposit and stay of recovery for the total amount of duty demanded. The Tribunal, after considering the submissions and finding a parallel with a relevant precedent case, granted the waiver and stay in favor of the appellants for the duty amount in question.In conclusion, the Tribunal's judgment addressed the classification of 'Red Mud' as an excisable item under the CETA Schedule, the imposition of duty, and the appeal for waiver of predeposit and stay of recovery. The Tribunal found a prima facie case for granting the waiver and stay based on similarities with a previous case, ultimately ruling in favor of the appellants on this issue.