2017 (4) TMI 787

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....mely "Char Fines/Lumps" is generated which fetches value on being sold. The appellants have not been paying duty on such char fines/lumps. The Order-in-Appeal has held that the said product is excisable goods specially in the wake of the amendment to clause (d) of Section 2 of Central Excise Act, 1994 in the form of an explanation that for the purpose of the said clause "Goods include any article, material or substance which is capable of being bought and sold for a consideration and such goods shall be deemed to be marketable". 2. Accordingly proceedings were initiated for confirmation of demand of Rs. 2,30,593/- along with interest and equal penalty in respect of "Char Fines / Lumps" cleared by the appellant during the period March 201....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....w: "8. The appellant has contested the said confirmation of demand of central excise duty on the ground that the char fines / lumps generated as residual unburnt coal wastage during the manufacture of Sponge Iron is not excisable goods and have relied on the several cases, as above. It is observed that the identical issue has been declared by the Hon'ble CESTAT in the case of Haryana Steel & Power Ltd. Vs. CCE Maysore 2015 (325) ELT 400 (Tri Bang), wherein it has been held that emergence of slag as by-product or waste during manufacture of sponge iron cannot be termed as amounting to manufacture of slag even after amendment in Section 2(d) of the Central Excise Act 1944. The relevant paras of said decision are reproduced below: ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....e of UOI vs. DSCL Sugar Ltd. 2015 (322) ELT 769 (SC) has held that merely that the goods are classifiable under Chapter heading of Central Excise Tariff and capable of being sold cannot be held to be excisable, until it has arisen as a result of manufacture as defined under rule 2(f) of the Central Excise Act, 1944. Having accepted this decision, the Board vide its Circular no. 1027/15/2016 dated 25.04.2016, has rescinded its earlier Circular no.904/24/2009 dated 28.10.2009, no. 941/02/2011 dated 14.02.2011 and instruction F.No.17/02/2009 dated 12.11.2014, which was regarding excisability of bagassee, aluminum / zinc dross. However, in para 4.2, the Board has clarified that "Consequently, Bagassee, Dross and skimmings of non-ferrous metals ....