Metal scrap duty applies only to manufacture-linked waste, not dismantling or repair scrap; other demands were set aside.

Duty on iron and steel waste and scrap was limited to scrap arising from manufacture or mechanical working of metals. Scrap generated from dismantling buildings, replacement or repair of machinery, discarded packing material, electrical fittings and similar non-manufacturing sources was treated as outside the duty net. Applying the distinction drawn in prior Tribunal decisions, only iron and steel scrap directly arising from manufacture of machine parts remained dutiable, while demands on the other categories were set aside. The penalty was reduced accordingly.

---

---

Issues: Whether duty was leviable on the various categories of iron and steel and other metal waste and scrap arising from dismantling of buildings, replacement of old machinery and parts, discarded packing material, and similar non-manufacturing sources, or only on scrap generated from manufacture or mechanical working.

Analysis: The applicable tariff position was that duty attaches to waste and scrap arising from manufacture or mechanical working of metals, not to scrap emerging from dismantling of buildings, repair or replacement of machinery, or discarded ancillary items. The distinction drawn in earlier Tribunal decisions was applied: scrap generated in the course of dismantling is different from scrap generated in the course of manufacture. On that basis, only the category of iron and steel scrap directly arising from manufacture of machine parts was treated as dutiable. The remaining categories, including scrap from dismantled structures, replaced parts, electrical fittings and packing materials, were held to be outside the charge of duty. Consequently, the penalty also required reduction.

Conclusion: Duty demand was sustainable only in respect of the scrap arising from manufacture, and the duty demands on the remaining categories were set aside. The penalty was reduced.

---