2016 (3) TMI 844

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ble under 7204 4900 and thereby denying the benefit of exemption under Notification No.12/2012, S.No.332. 3. He further submits that the issue is no more res integra and has already been decided by this Tribunal in the appellants own case reported in [2013 (288) E.L.T. 571 (Tri.   Chennai) 4. After allowing the application of early hearing, the appeal itself is taken up for hearing. The Adjudicating Authority classified the subject goods under CTH 73.02 of the Customs Tariff and denied the benefit of notification No.12/2012-Cus   Serial No.332. 5. The Commissioner (Appeals) in his order upheld the order of the adjudicating authority. 6. Since the subject goods are being regularly imported by the appellant company thr....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....t. Ltd. v. UOI - 2003 (156) E.L.T. 458 (P & H). The decision is in relation to rusted, pitted and perforated pipes. This decision is focused on the release of the goods. It does not raise the issue that the goods could be re-rolled and for that reason would not be classifiable under Heading 72.04. (iv) A.P. Steel Re-rolling Mills Ltd. v. CCE - 2004 (175) E.L.T. 580 (Tri.-Bang.) - classifying assorted iron scrap in different forms and shapes under Heading 72.04. (v) CCE v. Rimjhim Ispat Ltd. - 2005 (183) E.L.T. 283 (Tri.-Del.) old and used rails classifying old and used rails under Heading 72.04. Here the argument considered is that only a small portion of the goods were found to of doubtful nature. The exclusion for re-rollable scrap un....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....c tramways and conductor-rails etc. irrespective of their intended use . It is seen that the intended use is amplified to mean overhead transporters, mobile cranes, etc. Obviously the Note is not dealing with the intended use of re-rolling or melting. 23. Further we note that the heart and soul of this dispute is not whether the impugned item is rails or scrap. The actual dispute is whether the item is a  melting scrap  or  re-rollable scrap  for the purpose of Notification 21/2002-Cus. This issue is being fought by Revenue raising the classification of the goods mentioned in the Notification. In fact this dispute is not only in respect of used and cut pieces of rails but in respect of railway axles, used pipes and var....