TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2015 (2) TMI 226
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....seen that the matter was heard by the Division Bench on 07/01/2013, in remand proceedings and vide Interim Order No.163/2013, there was opinion of difference between the Member(Technical) and Member(Judicial) on the point of limitation. However, Member(Technical) expressed his opinion as regards merits of the case as also on limitation, rejecting the both, whereas Member(Judicial) only considered the limitation issue and held that the demand was barred by limitation. When the matter was placed before the Hon ble President, as third Member, on 06/09/2013, it was observed that inasmuch as the matter stands remanded by the Hon ble Chhattishgarh High Court for decision on merits as also on limitation, both the Members should have decided on the....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... such used goods so cleared by them. Revenue has confirmed the demand of duty under heading 40.04 of Central Excise Tariff. The said heading stands reproduced by the learned Member(Technical) in his order. As is seen, the same refers to waste and scrap of rubber as defined in Note 6 to the Chapter note of the said chapter. The Revenue s contention is that the goods of rubber definitely not usable as such because of cutting up, wear or other reasons would fall under Chapter 40. 5. On the other hand, the appellant s contention is that the conveyor belts were admittedly classifiable under heading 84.28 as material handling equipment and after frequent use they cleared the same as old and used conveyor belts only. No cutting up or slitting e....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....in cement factory is not dutiable as they are neither by-products of the final product nor subsidiary product. To be dutiable, waste and scrap must arise regularly and continuously produced in the course of manufacturing business of the product manufactured by the assessee. It further stands observed by the Hon ble Supreme Court that the metal, scrap and waste specified under heading 74.02 of Central Excise Tariff and read with Section Note 8(a) to Section XV of Central Excise Tariff has a very limited purpose of extending coverage to the particular item to the relevant tariff item in the schedule for determining the applicable rate of duty and this note cannot be construded to have any deeming effect in relation to the process of manufactu....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... as reversibility of the CENVAT credit on the sale of old and used conveyor belts. The contention of the appellant is that Rule 57S(2)(C) was introduced w.e.f. 1994 and was omitted in the new rules w.e.f. 01/07/2001. As such, the said rule was available from 1994 to 2001. The decision of the Tribunal in the case of Mysore Cements Ltd., having been decided in 2003, would relate to the period between 1994 to 01/07/2001 only, though the period is not specifically mentioned in the said decision. However I find in para 2 of the said decision, it stands mentioned that the credit was availed on 27/10/2001. As such, it can be safely concluded that the period involved in the Mysore Cements Ltd. case was after 1994 and before 01/07/2001, when the pro....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e used by the buyers, after some reprocessing etc. as conveyor belts only, in which case it cannot be held that it is waste and scrap falling under Chapter 40. At the stage, a common life example coming to my mind is a used and worn out wooden chair. It may happen that one leg of the chair gets broken and the owner of the same may treat as a waste for himself and clear the broken chair, as such. The buyer of the chair may choose to get the leg refixed and use the chair as chair. The question is whether in such circumstances, the wooden chair has to be treated as scrap of wood or as chair only. The answer would be clear that the broken chair, cleared as chair and further usable as chair, is required to be treated as chair only and not as ....