Extended limitation barred without suppression; steel sheet residue requires consignment-wise testing to decide scrap or sheet classification.

Departmental knowledge of removals and the absence of proved suppression prevented invocation of the extended limitation period, so the demand was confined to the normal six-month period. Residue from processed steel sheets could be treated as waste and scrap under the MODVAT and tariff scheme only if it was not usable as sheet material; if it remained usable as sheets, duty would apply at the sheet rate. On the present record, the scrap-versus-sheet character was not conclusively established and required consignment-wise reconsideration on the documentary evidence.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether the demand could be confined to the normal limitation period on the ground that the department had knowledge of the removals and there was no suppression of facts; (ii) whether the residue cleared from processed steel sheets was "waste and scrap" under the MODVAT and tariff scheme, or whether it remained sheet material requiring duty at the rate applicable to sheets.

Issue (i): Whether the demand could be confined to the normal limitation period on the ground that the department had knowledge of the removals and there was no suppression of facts.

Analysis: The record showed earlier proceedings, correspondence, approved classification lists, audits and gate passes reflecting the nature of the clearances. The department's knowledge of the generation and disposal of the material was established, and the allegation of mis-declaration or wilful suppression was not proved. In these circumstances, the extended period was not available.

Conclusion: The demand is confined to the normal period of six months and the larger period is not sustainable.

Issue (ii): Whether the residue cleared from processed steel sheets was "waste and scrap" under the MODVAT and tariff scheme, or whether it remained sheet material requiring duty at the rate applicable to sheets.

Analysis: The evidence on record, including technical material, witness statements and testing data, showed that the processed material lost the characteristics of original sheets and was treated in trade as scrap. At the same time, the controlling test under the tariff and MODVAT scheme was whether the goods were usable as sheets. The Court held that if the residue was usable as sheet, it could not be treated as waste and scrap. Since the goods had already been cleared, the factual question of usability had to be determined consignment-wise on documentary evidence.

Conclusion: The issue is not finally answered on the present record and requires reconsideration by the adjudicating authority on a consignment-wise basis.

Final Conclusion: The appeals succeed only to the extent that the demand is restricted to six months, while the question whether the disputed clearances were scrap or sheet material is sent back for fresh determination on the evidence relating to each clearance.

Ratio Decidendi: In MODVAT matters, residue from processed inputs can be cleared as waste and scrap only if it is not usable as sheet material, and the availability of the extended period depends on proof of suppression or mis-statement; where departmental knowledge is established, the extended limitation cannot be invoked.

---