Customs, Excise and Gold Tribunal - Delhi Tribunal

Shree Mahavir Ispat Ltd. vs Collector Of Customs on 3 December, 1996

Customs, Excise and Gold Tribunal – Delhi
Shree Mahavir Ispat Ltd. vs Collector Of Customs on 3 December, 1996
Equivalent citations: 1998 (60) ECC 621, 1998 (101) ELT 400 Tri Del


ORDER

Shiben K. Dhar, Member (T)

1. In this case the appeal had been dismissed for failure to make the pre-deposit of the duty demanded. The ld. Consultant submits that they had since made the deposit in compliance with Tribunal’s Stay Order No. 773/1987-B2, dated 17th Aug., 1987 and submits a copy of challan indicating deposit of Rs. 18,537.20. The ld. DR is satisfied. We, therefore, take up the appeal itself on merits since it is contended before us that it is a covered matter.

2. The short question that falls for determination in this appeal is whether copper scrap for the period prior to 1-3-1981 could be considered as crude copper in terms of Entry 26A of erstwhile Central Excise Tariff for the purpose of countervailing duty. Revenue have contended that such scrap is crude even prior to the period 1-3-1981.

3. Ld. Consultant arguing for the appellants submits that the imports pertain to the period March, 1979 and the Tariff Item was amended only w.e.f. 1-3-1981 so as to bring copper scrap within the purview of erstwhile Central Excise Tariff Item 26A. Prior to that scrap could not be considered as crude under Item 68.

4. Ld. DR while reiterating department’s arguments fairly concedes that this very Bench, following the ratio of the judgment of Kerala High Court and Bombay High Court have decided that such scrap prior to 1-3-1981 could not be considered as crude as covered by Tariff Entry 26A.

5. Similar question came for consideration before Tribunal in case of Collector of Customs, Calcutta v. U.P. Brassware Corporation Ltd. The Tribunal vide Final Order Nos. C/1068-1072/96-B, dated 11-9-1996 [reported in 1997 (92) E.L.T. 625 (Tribunal)], following the ratio of judgments in case of Coods Agro Chemicals and Ors. v. Asstt. Collector of Customs -1987 (32) E.L.T. 565 (Ker.) and Indo Plast and Anr. v. Union of India and Ors. -1987 (32) E.L.T. 463 (Bom.), held that such scrap could not be termed as copper crude prior to 1-3-1981.

6. Following the ratio of this order, therefore, we set aside the impugned order and allow the appeal.