Excise classification of aluminium scrap: misclassification as electric wires could not support duty under procedural rules.

Aluminium scrap cleared in a jumbled mass could not be treated as electric aluminium wires for excise purposes, because the goods were found on the facts to be scrap and not wires within Item 33B(ii) of the Central Excise Tariff. The attempt to sustain duty by invoking Rules 143 and 149, with reference to Trade Notice No. 185/69, was misplaced because those rules did not fit the factual situation. Reliance on Rule 50 and Rule 10A was also rejected for the same reason. The revision application was allowed and the petitioner's contention was accepted.

---

---

Issues: Whether aluminium scrap cleared in jumbled mass could be treated as electric aluminium wires for excise purposes and whether Rules 143, 149, 50 and 10A of the Central Excise Rules could be applied to demand duty.

Analysis: The goods were found to be scrap and not electric aluminium wires within Item 33B(ii) of the Central Excise Tariff. The lower authorities erred in proceeding on the basis that the goods were wires and in applying Rules 143 and 149 with reference to Collector's Trade Notice No. 185/69. The further reliance on Rule 50 and Rule 10A was also held to be misplaced on the facts of the case.

Conclusion: The revision application was allowed and the petitioner's contention was accepted.

Ratio Decidendi: Where the goods cleared are scrap and not excisable wires, excise liability cannot be sustained by misclassification or by applying procedural rules meant for a different factual situation.

---