2008 (7) TMI 677

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... for the Appellant. Shri T.C. Nair, Advocate, for the Respondent. [Order per : M.V. Ravindran, Member (J)]. -  This appeal is directed against the Order-in-Appeal No. SDK(63)63/MV/2003 dated 27-2-2003. 2. Considered the submission made by both sides and perused the records. 3. The issue involved in this case is regarding the dutiability of the waste products arising d....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ethnol, colouring impurities, D.E.G., would continue to be classifiable as impure form of MEG. If this was the case of the department on classification of the bye-product, the matter should have been examined with reference to consequential duty liability under CSH 2905/2910 of Central Excise Schedule, or in CSH 2942 of die schedule, as waste of product of Chapter heading 29 of the Schedule. In an....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

...., set aside." 4. As against these findings as reproduced above, the grounds of appeal of the department reads as under :- "The said order in appeal does not appear to be legal and proper on the following grounds :- 1. Commissioner (A) has not commented about the dutiability of the used Mono Ethylene Glycol as discussed in detail in the order in original. In fact, in the subje....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....subject order in appeal. 4. Therefore, an appeal against impugned order in appeal is proposed to be preferred." 5. It can be noticed from the grounds of appeal reproduced as above that the Revenue is not able to provide evidence regarding the classification of the waste MEG under 3950.90, in the category of plastic goods. In the absence of any evidence, that the product "used MEG" ....