https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=88972 Runners and risers were not to be treated uniformly as waste and scrap where the approved classification lists recognised two categories: those fit for rolling and those fit only for melting. Earlier decisions distinguishing runners and risers fit for rolling from scrap supported the assessee's classification. In the absence of any allegation that the goods cleared during the relevant period were unfit for rolling, and given prior approval of the classification lists, the differential duty demand could not be sustained on the basis of an earlier appellate observation. The demand was therefore held unsustainable. en-us Tue, 25 Nov 1997 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 22 Sep 2011 15:59:31 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=88972 Runners and risers were not to be treated uniformly as waste and scrap where the approved classification lists recognised two categories: those fit for rolling and those fit only for melting. Earlier decisions distinguishing runners and risers fit for rolling from scrap supported the assessee's classification. In the absence of any allegation that the goods cleared during the relevant period were unfit for rolling, and given prior approval of the classification lists, the differential duty demand could not be sustained on the basis of an earlier appellate observation. The demand was therefore held unsustainable. Case-Laws Central Excise Tue, 25 Nov 1997 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=88972