TMI Blog2000 (2) TMI 319X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... [Order per : Jyoti Balasundaram, Member (J)]. - The Appellants herein filed a classification list in respect of ( 1) M.S. Bars (Round) of Iron and (2) M.S. Bars (Rectangular) of Iron, claiming classification of both the items under Central Excise Tariff sub-heading 7214.90 and claiming the benefit of exemption from duty in terms of Notification No. 202/88, dated 20-5-1988. On 22-2-1991 a show c ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... demands were confirmed vide orders dated 31-7-1991 and 24-10-1991 respectively. The assessees filed three appeals before the Commissioner (Appeals), who, vide the impugned order, held that the inputs are old and used re-rollable material from Kabaries, are re-rolled into bars and rods; they are neither ingots or other primary form, nor semi-finished products nor roughly shaped pieces by rolling of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ent appeal has been filed against the denial of benefit of nil rate of duty and the confirmation of demand of Rs. 9,566.13. 2. We have heard Shri B.M. Das, ld. Consultant who submits that re-rollable materials are covered by S. No. 2 of the Notification No. 202/88 and he relied upon the Tribunal decision in the case of Mahavir Steel Industries v. C.C.E., Pune reported in 1995 (78) E.L.T. 604 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... arded as angles, shapes, or sections and they are not specified as eligible inputs in Notification No. 202/88, and hence the benefit of the Notification is not available. This order has been subsequently followed in the case of Rehal Industries Corporation (supra). The same view has been taken by the Tribunal in the case of Shreeram Steel Industries (supra). In the present case, there is no disput ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... fication does not use the expression "exclusively manufactured out of". In the present case, there is no dispute that the only input is re-rollable scraps which are old and unserviceable. Therefore, the ratio of the Mahavir Steel Industries case (supra) is not attracted in the facts of the present case. 4. In the light of the above discussions we hold that the appellants are not eligible to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|