Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether the removed parts, after replacement in motor cycles and clearance as scrap, could be treated as waste and scrap so as to deny the duty demand and the MODVAT-related defence.
Analysis: The definition of waste and scrap in Section Note 6(a) of Section XV of the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985 covers metal waste and scrap definitely not usable as such because of breakage, cutting up, wear or other reasons. The parts in question had been originally used in completed motor cycles and were discarded only because they did not meet performance expectations; they were removed in the same condition without mutilation or processing. The distinction between items that are not used and items that are not usable was treated as material. Since the parts were actually usable and were replaced for better functioning of the vehicles, they did not satisfy the statutory concept of waste and scrap. The plea based on by-products and the procedural objections under the MODVAT rules was also not accepted.
Conclusion: The subject parts were not waste and scrap within the meaning of the tariff entry and the duty demand was upheld against the assessee.
Ratio Decidendi: Goods that are removed in the same usable condition after being replaced for better performance do not become waste and scrap merely because they are no longer preferred for use.