TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Tribunal rules waste from maintenance not excisable under Central Excise Act.</h1> <h3>PRISM CEMENT LTD. Versus COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE, BHOPAL</h3> The Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellant, determining that waste and scrap arising during maintenance and repair work were not excisable under the ... Scrap – dutiability - MS turning, boring scrap has arisen during repairing work such as making required size holes on the iron pieces, shaping of iron sheets etc. – appellants’ submission that they are not engaged in manufacture of any plant or equipment or any products of iron and steel but only undertake activity of repairs and maintenance, is accepted – since no any credit is taken on items used in repair and maintenance, no duty is payable on impugned scrap – appellant’s appeal is allowed Issues:1. Whether certain waste and scrap arising during repair and maintenance work is excisable under the Central Excise Tariff Act 1985.2. Whether duty is liable on MS scrap, borings, turnings, etc. generated during maintenance and repair work.Analysis:Issue 1: The appellant, engaged in the manufacture of cement and cement clinkers, also undertakes repair and maintenance work involving mechanical processes on iron pieces. The dispute centered on whether the waste and scrap generated during such activities are excisable under the Central Excise Tariff Act 1985. The authorities had held the waste and scrap as excisable based on Section Note 5(a) of Section XV. However, the appellant argued that they are not manufacturing iron and steel products but solely engaged in repair and maintenance, using various materials without claiming credit on them. Citing relevant case laws, the appellant contended that the waste and scrap should not be considered excisable.Issue 2: After hearing both parties, the Tribunal considered the submissions. It was established that the appellant's primary business was maintenance and repair, not the manufacturing of iron and steel products. Furthermore, it was undisputed that no credit had been taken on the materials used for repair and maintenance. Consequently, the Tribunal concluded that no duty was applicable on the MS scrap, borings, turnings, etc., generated during the repair and maintenance activities. Therefore, the appeals were allowed, providing the appellant with consequential relief.In conclusion, the Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellant, determining that the waste and scrap arising during maintenance and repair work were not excisable under the Central Excise Tariff Act 1985. The decision was based on the appellant's business activities, the absence of manufacturing iron and steel products, and the non-claiming of credit on materials used for repair and maintenance. As a result, no duty was deemed liable on the waste and scrap generated during the repair and maintenance processes, leading to the allowance of the appeals with consequential relief.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
