TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2011 (4) TMI 1168
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....sioner (Appeals), we have heard all the appeals together and are being disposed of by this common order. 2. These appeals arise from order dated November, 2003 passed by the Commissioner (Appeals), Nasik. By the impugned order, the challenge to the dutiability to ferrous waste was rejected by the Commissioner (Appeals). In fact, the Asst. Commissioner, Nasik by his orders dated 21st September, 1998, 15th October, 1998 and 10th August, 1999 had confirmed the duty demand in relation to ferrous waste while classifying the same under Chapter Heading 7204 of the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985 (CETA), along with some other scraps and waste products. While the challenge in relation to other items was accepted by the Commissioner (Appeals) t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....d. - 2009 (237) E.L.T. 503 (Tri.-Bang.) and Kissan Co-op. Sugar Factory Ltd. v C.C.E., Meerut-II - 2008 (226) E.L.T. 196 (Tri.-Del.) submitted that the duty can be imposed on those items which are either manufactured or which are generated in the process of manufacture and since the ferrous waste was neither manufactured nor generated in the process of manufacture, the same could not have been subjected to duty liability merely because the ferrous waste is mentioned under Ch. Heading 7204 in the CETA. He further submitted that ferrous waste was not generated out of any process of manufacture contemplated under Section 2(f) of the Central Excise Act, 1944. Drawing our attention to Section Note 8 to Section XV of the CETA the learned Counsel ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....sp;Once it is undisputed fact that the parts of the capital goods get worn out in the course of or a result of the manufacturing process pertaining to the final product, it cannot be accepted that such wearing out of the product was not in relation to the process of manufacturing of the final product. It is not that merely a product which goes directly in the manufacturing process those can generate the ferrous waste which can be subjected to duty liability. Even the part of the capital goods which periodically wear out on account of manufacturing process then such wearing out will be in relation to the manufacturing process. The Section Note 8 of the Section XV clearly reads "Metal waste and scrap from the manufacture or mechanical working....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... quantity of the scrap and waste is generated in the course of dismantling of old and damaged locomotives." 9. The Tribunal further held that the Hon'ble Calcutta High Court was relying on the provisions contained in Heading 72 onwards of the Central Excise Tariff Act which stood at that time in relation to waste and scrap generated by breaking of ships and boats and other floating structures, so the said decision by the Calcutta High Court cannot have any application to the waste generated in the appellant's factory. Consequently, the said decision of the Calcutta High Court or Note 7 to Section XV of the CETA cannot have any application to the facts on hand. Chapter Note 7 deals with waste and scrap generated in the process of break....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... manufactured by the assessee in the factory, by considering the definition of provisions of law held that the waste and scrap obtained in the course of manufacture by the assessee were not goods and there was no event of manufacture of waste and scrap and, therefore, there was no duty liability. It is unfortunate that the appellant's Counsel chose to rely upon the decision which was delivered in the year 1986 when the law has undergone sea change. It is well established by now by the decisions of Hon'ble Supreme Court, various High Courts and Tribunals that no waste and scrap generated in the process of manufacture is subjected to duty liability. 12. In Apollo Tyres Ltd. case the Tribunal was dealing with the case wherein the assesse....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....la Corporation Ltd. v. C.C.E., Bhopal - 2009 (236) E.L.T. 476 (Tri.- Del.) relied upon by the learned Counsel for the appellants the Tribunal held that the scrap generated out of discarded used capital goods do not warrant duty as neither Chapter Note 8(a) of Section XV of the CETA is applicable nor the process of cutting of the metal would amount to manufacture in terms of provisions of law comprised under Section 2(f) of the said Act. Here again the point which is for consideration in the matter in hand and answered as above was not before the Tribunal and the decision was totally different aspect on the matter and, therefore, not applicable to the facts of the case. 15. As regard the decision of the Larger Bench the same is in rela....