TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
1991 (2) TMI 264
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....der dated. 16-2-1985 passed by the Assistant Collector of Central Excise, Jamshedpur. By his said order,'-the Assistant Collector had held that the credit of duty taken under Rule 56A of the Central Excise Rules could not be utilised towards payment of duty on Bell ends and Front ends and Boring and Turnings arising in the course of manufacture of seamless pipes and tubes. He relied upon the provisions of Rule 56A (3) (vi) (a) of the Central Excise Rules, 1944, for such a view. He had observed that these items i.e. Bell ends and Front ends and Turnings and Borings are neither finished goods for manufacture of which the duty paid materials like steel Blooms/Bars were permitted to be brought into the factory nor are they the duty paid materia....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e appellants, that the appeal was for this Bench to decide. Accordingly, the appeal was posted for hearing on 23-1-1991. 4. When the appeal came up for hearing, Shri N. Mookherjee, learned Counsel for the appellants and Shri S.P. Katyan, Production Controller of the appellants represented them. It was clarified by them in reply to a query from the Bench that the transferred appeal has not been decided. They agreed that the appeal falls within the competence of this Bench. 5. Shri Mookherjee, learned Counsel for the appellants submitted copies of the order of the Assistant Collector which had been upheld by the Collector (Appeals) in his impugned order as well as a copy of an earlier order-in-appeal dated 16-4-1984 passed by Collector ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... (3) (vi) (a) stipulates that the credit of duty allowed in respect of any material or component part may be utilised towards payment of duty on any finished excisable goods for the manufacture of which such material or component parts were permitted to be brought into the factory under sub-rule (2) of Rule 56A. That means that the said credit can be utilised only for payment of duty on their product - Seamless Pipes and Tubes and not for the duty on the waste products. They had not been permitted to receive the duty paid material for the manufacture of the said waste. He, therefore, reiterated his submission that the impugned order is correct in law and deserves to be upheld and the appeal rejected. 7. We have considered the submissions....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....aid facility from April, 1967 till 1-3-1982. The classification of the waste declared by them in the classification list dated 1-3-1982 under Item 26AA(i) was changed by the Department to 26 with a reference to Notification No. 147/77 and remark "to be used as remelting scrap only". In a subsequent classification list dated 19-7-1982 the same was classified under Item 26AA. All the same, credit was utilised by them for the payment of duty on the waste. A show cause notice was issued alleging improper availment of credit. Demand of duty of Rs. 9,74,918.31 for the period from 1-3-1982 to 22-2-1983 was issued pursuant to the adjudication of the case. Their appeal against the order was allowed by the Collector (Appeals) vide his Order-in-Appeal....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ed saying they are not finished excisable goods. The alternative objection taken that they are not the goods for the manufacture of which the materials - billets - had been permitted to be brought into the factory in the light of the provisions of Rule 56A (3) (vi) (a) has to be examined. The appellants have applied for permission to bring billets for manufacture of Seamless Pipes and Tubes. They have obviously not brought the inputs for the manufacture of end cuttings etc. which are waste inputs for the manufacture of only the waste products. Such waste products arise in the manufacture of finished products. 8. It can be argued that their application for permission with reference to Seamless Pipes and Tubes constituted an implicit appli....