2008 (1) TMI 869

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....de, Jt. CDR JUDGMENT These two appeals are filed against Order-in-Original No. 14/CEX/2001 dated August 2001. The appellant is in appeal against the confirmation of demand of duty against them and revenue is in appeal against the non-imposition of penalty by the adjudicating authority. The appellant has also filed a cross objection against the appeal filed by the revenue. 2. Heard both si....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....analogy he ash said that the appellant is liable to pay duty. We find that identical issue as regards the skimming and dross of aluminium metal sheets was before the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CCE, vs. Indian Aluminium Co, Ltd.. Their Lordship while dismissing the Civil appeal of the revenue held as under :- "17. The entry in question does not contain any legal fiction. It does no....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....court in Indian Aluminium (supra) in fact noticed that some amount of metal is found in dross and skimming. A distinction, however, was made that dross and skimming are not metals in the same class as 'waste or scrap'. Even assuming that dross having a high percentage of metal is a marketable commodity, the question, in or opinion, would arise to whether the same can be said to be a manufa....