Excise duty on slag residue denied where the material lacked recoverable metal and did not have excisable character.

Slag arising in the manufacture of blooms and billets was held not liable to excise duty because it was merely thrown away residue, had no recoverable metal, and lacked excisable character. The Tribunal treated the earlier sale of slag for metal recovery as distinguishable and followed prior decisions that similar slag from iron and steel manufacture was not dutiable absent a marketable excisable product. The appeal succeeded.

---

---

Issues: Whether slag arising in the manufacture of blooms and billets and thrown away was liable to excise duty.

Analysis: The slag in question was considered in the light of its actual disposal and commercial character. The prior sale of slag was shown to be for recovery of metal, and the material under consideration was stated to contain no recoverable metal. The Tribunal also followed earlier decisions holding similar slag arising in iron and steel manufacture not to be excisable, applying the principle that such residue would not attract duty absent excisable character.

Conclusion: The slag was not liable to excise duty and the appeal succeeded.

---