https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=107096 Scrap arising from wear and tear of ingot moulds in a unit operating under Section 3A was held not liable to central excise duty because it did not arise from any manufacturing process. The governing distinction was that scrap generated through manufacture or mechanical working may attract duty, whereas scrap caused by dismantling or incidental wear and tear does not where no manufacturing activity produces it. On that basis, the duty demand was unsustainable and the appeal succeeded. en-us Wed, 16 Oct 2002 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 17 Mar 2012 15:59:24 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=107096 Scrap arising from wear and tear of ingot moulds in a unit operating under Section 3A was held not liable to central excise duty because it did not arise from any manufacturing process. The governing distinction was that scrap generated through manufacture or mechanical working may attract duty, whereas scrap caused by dismantling or incidental wear and tear does not where no manufacturing activity produces it. On that basis, the duty demand was unsustainable and the appeal succeeded. Case-Laws Central Excise Wed, 16 Oct 2002 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=107096