https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=101042 Spent palladium was not shown to fall within Chapter 26 or any other tariff heading, and the Department failed to produce acceptable evidence of classification. In the absence of proof that the material was excisable goods, duty could not be demanded and reversal of Modvat credit was not warranted. The analysis also applied the principle that waste or residue emerging without manufacture does not automatically become excisable goods under excise law. On that basis, the demand for Central Excise duty or credit reversal was held unsustainable. en-us Tue, 15 Jan 2002 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 08 Feb 2012 13:35:24 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=101042 Spent palladium was not shown to fall within Chapter 26 or any other tariff heading, and the Department failed to produce acceptable evidence of classification. In the absence of proof that the material was excisable goods, duty could not be demanded and reversal of Modvat credit was not warranted. The analysis also applied the principle that waste or residue emerging without manufacture does not automatically become excisable goods under excise law. On that basis, the demand for Central Excise duty or credit reversal was held unsustainable. Case-Laws Central Excise Tue, 15 Jan 2002 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=101042