TMI Blog1996 (9) TMI 372X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... cise Tariff. The appellants were bringing duty-paid stainless steel sheets classifiable under Item No. 25 of the Tariff and were processing them to manufacture laminations and stampings classifiable under Item No. 28A of the Tariff. Stainless sheets brought from outside were subjected to the process of blanking and during the process of blanking certain scraps arise. The appellants had availed of pro- forma credit in respect of the sheets and the credit taken was to be utilised towards the payment of excise duty on the stampings classifiable under Item No. 28A. The Collector of Central Excise (Appeals) had held that the waste and scrap in question had arisen before the sheets reached the stage of stamping. He had classified the waste and sc ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on presented at the time of personal hearing. I have also gone through the order of the Assistant Collector appealed against. In the instant case, I find that according to the Assistant Collector the scraps/wastes is from steel sheets falling under T.I. 25. The appellants, however, submitted that once these sheets are used for the next operation i.e. blanking then the goods get classified under T.I. 28A even though such goods have not been fully converted into stampings and therefore any scrap/waste arising from this stage will fall under T.I. 28A and not under T.I. 25. I do not agree with the contention of the appellants. In my view the scrap/waste arising in the process of manufacture of stampings i.e. before the goods reach the stage of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... a different view in the matter. The learned Adv. had referred to the decision of another Collector (Appeals) where he had held that as the scrap had arisen during the manufacture of electrical stampings it had to be held that it had arisen out of the goods falling under Item No . 28A. He had observed as under : I have considered the submissions made by Shri D. Pillay, Supdt. C. Excise and Shri Marfatia, Company Secretary of the Respondents. The respondents had claimed the benefit of Notification No. 204/83, dated 1-8-1983 in respect of the scrap which arise during the manufacture of electrical stampings falling under T.I. 28A. They also availed of the benefit of Notification No. 95/83 dated 1-3-1983 in respect of steel sheets used for th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... that stage the waste and scrap had not arisen from the goods classifiable under Item 28A of the Tariff. At the stage of blanking the sheets were not classifiable under Item No. 28A. They remain classifiable under Item No. 25 of the Tariff. The expression used in the Notification is such waste and scrap have arisen from goods falling under any item other than the said item No. 25. In the order relied upon by the learned Advocate there is no discussion that the waste had arisen in the process of blanking or after the process of blanking. 9. In view of the above we consider that the view taken by the Collector, Central Excise (Appeals) does not suffer from any infirmity. In the result the appeal is rejected. - - TaxTMI - TMITax - Cen ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
