1998 (2) TMI 211

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....issue my predecessor had already passed Order-in-Appeal No. 538/93, dated 30-8-1993 wherein it has been held that the inputs used by the appellants for the manufacture of `Fire Retardant Compound' were waste, parings and scrap of plastics (39.15) in the form of cut pieces of PVC Profiles and Modvat credit availed on PVC Profiles shapes as inputs for `doors, windows' etc. could not be utilised towards payment of duty on `Fire Retardant Compound'. I do not find any change in the subject matter of the present appeal than the earlier appeal. As such appellants do not appear to have a strong case. Thus the appeal is liable to be dismissed. In view of the foregoing, I do not see any reason to interfere with the impugned order. Therefore, I uph....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ay any duty on waste paring and scrap on the cut pieces of profiles; that when no duty was paid on waste parings and scrap of cut pieces of profiles said to be used as inputs for the manufacture of Fire Retardant Compound (final product) how they can utilise Modvat credit earned on inputs to be used for other final products. The ld. SDR submits that cuttings, parings and scrap were waste and scrap; that the waste and scrap arise as by-product and not as intermediate product. The ld. SDR submits that in the instant case, cuttings, parings and scrap arise out of PVC Profile shapes and PVC Profile shapes are exempted from payment of duty, therefore, in terms of Rule 57C, the appellants cannot avail the inputs duty taken as Modvat credit. The l....