https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=266082 Aluminium dross and skimming arising during manufacture of aluminium products were held not to be excisable goods because tariff classification alone did not establish excisability; marketability as goods had to be shown. The Tribunal found that the earlier Supreme Court ruling remained applicable, as no reliable evidence of a recognised market, commercial listings, market quotations, or established trade was produced, and mere regular sale or a quoted price was insufficient. Chapter Note 3 to Chapter 26 was also found inapplicable because no evidence showed that the residue was used in industry for metal extraction or for manufacture of metal-based chemical compounds. The duty demand was unsustainable and the appeal failed. en-us Fri, 24 Apr 2015 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 13 Feb 2016 13:02:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=266082 Aluminium dross and skimming arising during manufacture of aluminium products were held not to be excisable goods because tariff classification alone did not establish excisability; marketability as goods had to be shown. The Tribunal found that the earlier Supreme Court ruling remained applicable, as no reliable evidence of a recognised market, commercial listings, market quotations, or established trade was produced, and mere regular sale or a quoted price was insufficient. Chapter Note 3 to Chapter 26 was also found inapplicable because no evidence showed that the residue was used in industry for metal extraction or for manufacture of metal-based chemical compounds. The duty demand was unsustainable and the appeal failed. Case-Laws Central Excise Fri, 24 Apr 2015 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=266082