Spent nickel catalyst held non-excisable as no manufacture was found; appeal succeeded on central excise duty liability.

Spent nickel catalyst was treated as not resulting from manufacture and therefore not excisable to central excise duty, with the Tribunal following its earlier decisions and finding no reason to depart from them. Because excisability was the core issue, it declined to examine limitation and other contentions. The appeal was allowed.

---

---

Issues: Whether spent nickel catalyst was excisable and liable to central excise duty.

Analysis: The Tribunal followed its earlier decisions holding that spent nickel catalyst was not manufactured and therefore not excisable. It found no reason to depart from those decisions and declined to examine the other contentions, including limitation, since the core issue was .

Conclusion: Spent nickel catalyst was held not to be excisable, and the appeal was allowed.

---