2004 (5) TMI 171

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... e appellants against the impugned order-in-original, the issue relates to the excisability of gun metal scrap and rubber scrap. The adjudicating authority has held these items to be excisable/dutiable and confirmed the duty demand of Rs. 2,97,548/- with equal amount of penalty and interest against the appellants. 2. The learned Counsel has contested the excisability of gun metal scrap by stating .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... -9-2001. The appellants contested the duty demand on various grounds. The Commissioner, however confirmed the duty demand in all of Rs. 6,36,624/- out of which Rs. 2,97,548/- related to duty on the gun metal scrap and rubber/conveyor belt scrap. However, that order of the Commissioner was set aside by the Tribunal vide order dated 4-6-2003 and matter relating to the dutiability of gun metal scrap .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... he period in dispute for castings. It had been put to us as an essential component of the machinery/equipment since it protects from corrosion and has a high tolerance limit but after repeated use, looses its essential characteristics. 5. The provisions of Rule 57-S(2)(c) and Rule 57AB(2)(b) referred to above, could not be invoked for demanding duty as the appellants had not sold the capital good .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X