TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2000 (11) TMI 733
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s iron and steel articles. The dispute in the present appeal relates to availability of Notification No. 19/88-C.E., dated 1-3-1988 as amended vide Notification No. 27/91-C.E., dated 25-7-1991 to granulated slag. The said notification grants exemption to goods falling under Chapter 26 of the schedule to the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985, from the whole of duty of excise leviable thereon, subject to the condition that no credit of duty paid on the inputs, used in the manufacture of said goods, has been taken under Rule 56A or Rule 57A of the Central Excise Rules, 1944. There is no dispute about the fact that the granulated slag is classifiable under Chapter 26 of Central Excise Tarrif Act, 1985, manufactured from the blast furnace slag, wh....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....as not been availed by the manufacturer. Inasmuch as admittedly the appellant has not taken the Modvat credit of duties paid on the inputs, they have satisfied the condition of the said notification. He has also submitted that the inputs were either exempted or non-dutiable and as such the question of taking of credit does not arise at all. In any case submits the ld. Advocate that the above factual position is not disputed. The benefit of the notification has been denied on the ground that the appellants have availed the benefit of Notification No. 217/86 in respect of waste and scrap of iron arising during the course of manufacture of their final product. Inasmuch as one of the conditions of Notification No. 217/86 was that the final prod....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....wledge of the Revenue inasmuch as they had been availing the said exemption right from inception. The classification lists were filed and duly approved and as such the mala fide intention cannot be attributed to them for the purposes of invocation of longer period of limitation. 6. Countering the arguments Shri N.C. Roychowdhury, ld. Sr. Advocate along with Shri Prantosh Mukherjee, ld. Advocate submitted that admittedly the appellants have availed the benefit of Notification No. 217/86 in respect of waste and scrap which was not available to them inasmuch as the final product i.e. granulated slag was being cleared by them without payment of duty. As such if not directly the appellants have indirectly contravened the condition of the....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....final product must not be cleared at the nil rate of duty or without payment of duty. But then what would be the result of clearance of granulated slag at nil rate of duty? The answer is very simple that the Notification No. 217/86 would not be available to waste and scrap of iron. We really fail to comprehend as to how the non-availability of Notification No. 217/86 in respect of waste and scrap would result in contravention of condition of Notification No. 19/88, as amended which is to the effect that no credit of duty paid on the inputs has been taken. Admittedly as waste and scrap was being cleared without payment of duty, question of taking any credit in respect of such waste and scrap used in the manufacture of granulated slag does no....