1992 (5) TMI 96

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....r Foundry & Castings Ltd. who are the respondents herein, holding that they were eligible for proforma credit under Rule 56A in respect of Turnings and Borings (Scrap) received by them from M/s. Telco as the same had arisen from duty paid iron and steel products. He had observed in his impugned order that since duty leviable on scrap and waste were not paid by M/s. Telco the credit of duty available to the appellants before him is not the duty applicable to the scrap and waste but they were entitled to credit of duty at the rate applicable to the material out of where the scrap had arisen. 2. In the present appeal, the appellant Collector has urged that the respondents had received waste and scrap of steel on which excise duty had not be....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....eaded that the appeal be allowed. 4. Shri Sekhar Mukhopadhyay, learned Counsel for the respondents argued their case and submitted that the impugned order is correct and should be upheld. He handed over a copy of the Bombay Collectorate Trade Notice No. 34/83 dated 31-10-1983 wherein reference has been made to the issue of directions by the Central Government under the proviso to Rule 56A(3)(i)(b) of the Central Excise Rules. He pleaded that the appeal of the Department be dismissed. . 5. We have considered the submissions. We have perused the record. As regards the point raised in the appeal that no appeal was maintainable originally as it was against a clarification issued by the Assistant Collector in reply to reference made by the....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ppeals). We are not inclined to allow the plea that the order-in-appeal should be set aside on the ground that the appeal before Collector (Appeals) was time barred. 5A. The impugned order was decided in favour of the respondents by the Collector (Appeals) only on the ground that the scrap (turnings and borings of steel) which arose from duty paid steel products should be treated to be duty paid. He has not decided the appeal by applying the order issued by the Government under Rule 56A(3)(i)(b) proviso, which did away with the need to produce Gate Passes in given situations. On the criterion applied by the Collector (Appeals), we find that while the raw material was duty paid it did not mean that scrap arising therefrom should be treate....