Customs, Excise and Gold Tribunal - Mumbai
Nelton India vs Commissioner Of C. Ex. And Cus. on 23 November, 2005
ORDER
Jyoti Balasundaram, Vice-President
1. The authorities below have rejected the claim for refund of Rs. 2,42,403/- being the duty paid by the appellants on plastic waste and scrap during the period from 18-5-95 to August, 1997 on the ground that duty was correctly paid by them on the scrap as the benefit of exemption in terms of Notification No. 89/95-C.E., dated 18-5-95 claimed by the appellants was not available to them and therefore, the question of refund of excise duty did not arise. The ground on which it has been held that the duty was correctly paid on plastic waste and scrap is that the proviso to the Notification exempting waste and scrap itself stipulates that nothing contained in this Notification shall apply to waste, sparing and scrap cleared from a factory in which any other excisable goods other than exempted goods are also manufactured, and the factual position is that the assessees were manufacturing both excisable as well as exempted goods in their factory.
2. None appears for the appellants in spite of notice; hence we heard the Id. DR and perused the records. We find that the authorities below have correctly held that the appellants were not entitled to the benefit of Notification No. 89/95-C.E. and therefore whatever duty was paid by them on plastic waste and scrap generated in their factory was rightly paid and therefore the refund claim is not admissible. We accordingly uphold the impugned order and dismiss the appeal.