2007 (12) TMI 65 - AT - Central Excise

Appellate Tribunal upholds duty demand on cast iron powder despite Trade Notice

The appeal was rejected by the Appellate Tribunal CESTAT, Ahmedabad, regarding duty demand, interest, and penalty on clearances of cast iron powder. ... In appellant’s own case process of producing cast iron powder out of iron scrap, other scrap & iron boring was held as manufacture - Now assessee contend the same on basis of their favourable trade notice127/94 – as per this notice manufacturing cast iron powder out of cast iron granules would not amount to manufacture – held that contents of the Trade Notice cannot be given effect to by overlooking and thus nullifying the decision of the Tribunal in their own case – demand & penalty justified Issues:- Appeal against the order of the Commissioner (Appeals) regarding duty demand, interest, and penalty on clearances made during a specific period.- Interpretation of the dutiability of cast iron powder manufacturing process.- Consideration of Trade Notice clarifying the manufacturing process and its impact on excisability.Analysis:The appeal in this case was made against the order of the Commissioner (Appeals) concerning duty demand, interest, and penalty imposed on clearances made during a particular period. The appellant purchased cast iron scraps from the market, subjected them to various processes, and produced cast iron powder in different sieve sizes. The Original Authority confirmed a demand along with interest and penalty, which was partially reduced by the Commissioner (Appeals). The appellant relied on a Trade Notice clarifying that manufacturing cast iron powder from cast iron granules would not amount to 'manufacture' for the purpose of the Central Excise Act, 1944.The Tribunal considered the submissions from both sides, including the Trade Notice dated 5-8-94, which favored the appellant's position. The Trade Notice emphasized that the processes carried out did not result in a new commodity emerging, as the identity, character, and usage of the product remained the same. However, despite the favorable Trade Notice, the Tribunal noted that the dutiability had already been decided against the appellant in a previous order. The Tribunal highlighted that the Trade Notice could not nullify the Tribunal's decision in the appellant's own case, where the excisability and dutiability had been established.Ultimately, the Tribunal rejected the appeal, emphasizing that while the Trade Notice was favorable to the appellant, it could not supersede the Tribunal's final decision on the dutiability of the cast iron powder manufacturing process. The judgment was pronounced on 6-12-2007 by the Appellate Tribunal CESTAT, Ahmedabad, with the decision being based on the established legal principles and precedents in the case.