Excise record-keeping for in-process material: spent methanol need not be entered where no prescribed register exists.

Spent methanol treated as in-process material and not yet established as industrial waste was not required to be entered in excise registers on the facts found. The relevant record-keeping rules applied to finished goods and to goods for which statutory maintenance was specifically prescribed, and no specific register had been prescribed for in-process material. The department also failed to disprove the assessee's position that the material had not yet acquired the character of industrial waste. The view of the appellate authority was therefore accepted, and the duty demand could not be sustained.

---

---

Issues: Whether spent methanol, stated to be in-process material and industrial waste, was required to be entered in the excise registers so as to justify recovery of duty.

Analysis: The record showed that no specific register had been prescribed for accounting of in-process material. The relevant rules governing maintenance of records applied to finished goods and goods for which statutory record-keeping was prescribed, and not to in-process material. The department also failed to produce evidence disproving the assessee's claim that the material had not yet acquired the character of industrial waste or reached that stage. The view taken by the Commissioner (Appeals) was therefore found to be correct.

Conclusion: The assessee was not liable to account for the spent methanol in the excise registers on the facts found, and the demand could not be sustained.

---