TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (5) TMI 1686
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....uring of such product, raw materials such as billets, ingots, waste and scraps, etc. are melted and accumulated mass of the metal is then rolled into desired sheet. During such conversion, a portion is alienated by forming a waste lump which is then allowed to cool and is commonly known as "Dross". 2.1 The respondent is clearing the said Aluminium Dross without payment of duty being in the nature of waste or residue arising during the course of manufacture of Hot Rolled Aluminium Products. 2.2 An investigation was conducted and it was found that the respondent is not paying duty for the clearance of Aluminium Dross. Therefore, various show-cause notices were issued to the respondent for the period April 2001 to March, 2016 demanding duty ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....onomic Zones which are produced or manufactured in India as, and at the rates, set forth in the First Schedule to the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985 (5 of 1986). Clause (d) of section 2 of the Central Excise Act, 1944 defines excisable goods as "goods specified in the First Schedule and Second Schedule to the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985 (5 of the 1986) as being subject to a duty of excise and includes salt." An Explanation has been added by Section 78 of the Finance Act, 2008 (18 of 2008) to clarify "goods" includes any article, material or substance which is capable or being bought and sold for a consideration and such goods shall be deemed to be marketable. It is an established principle of legal interpretation that an Explanation ad....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....l for the respondent, submits that the issue is no longer res integra and is settled in favour of the respondent-assessee by the various judicial pronouncements. To support his contention, he relies on the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Commissioner of Central Excise vs. Indian Aluminium Co. Ltd. : 2006 (203) ELT 3 (SC) and Circular No. 941/02/2011-CX dated 14-02-2011, wherein the issue was that the Zinc Dross and flux are excisable or not ? In this case, the issue was that the Zinc Dross are not excisable. 3.1 It is further submitted that the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of Hindalco Industries Limited Vs. Union of India reported in 2015 (315) ELT 10 (Bom.), which has been affirmed by the Hon'ble Apex Court a....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.....f. 10.05.2008). The demand in the Show Cause Notice was confirmed by the Adjudicating Authority vide Order-in-Original dated 10.11.2009 which confirmed the demand of Rs. 5,09,838/- as against excise duty of Rs. 5,83,357/- proposed in the Show Cause Notice. TheOrder-in-Original also imposed penalty of Rs. 1,25,000/- Appeal against the Order-in-Original was dismissed by the Ld. Commissioner (Appeals) vide Order-in-Appeal dated 28.01.2010. Hence, the present appeal before the Tribunal. 3. The Ld. Advocate appearing on behalf of the Appellant submitted that the issue involved in the present case has already been settled in favour of the Appellant by Hon'ble Bombay High Court, in the Appellant‟s own case-Hindalco Industries Ltd Vs. UOI....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....n'ble Supreme Court in a case of M/s Union of India and Ors Vs. M/s. DSCL Sugar Ltd. (2015-TIOL-240-SC-CX=2015 (322) ELT 769 (S.C.)). Dated 15.07.2015. Hon'ble Supreme Court examined the issue and reaffirmed that bagasse is not a manufactured product. The Judgment applies to both periods, before and after the insertion of explanation in Section 2 (d) of the Central Excise Act, 1944 by the Finance Act, 2008. It may also be noted that Hon'ble High Court of Bombay in case of M/s Hindalco Industries Ltd. Vs. Union of India [2015 (315) E.L.T. 10 (Bom)) came to similar conclusion in relation to dross and skimming of aluminium, Zink or other non-ferrous metal. 3. In the light of the above dudgments, circulars of the Board on the ....