Commissioner of Central Excise Vs. Swill Ltd.

Commissioner of Central Excise vs Swill Ltd.

Type Court Judgment Court Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai Decided Jul 14, 1998

~1 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/13860

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

Citation: sooperkanoon.com/13860
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided On: Jul 14, 1998
Subject: Excise

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Excise

Key legal issue: Excise

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Commissioner of Central Excise

Respondent

Swill Ltd.

Legal References

Reported In: (1999)(108)ELT749Tri(Mum.)bai

Excerpt

1. the question for consideration in these 7 appeals is deemed modvat credit on zinc and nickel silver. in the order impugned in the appeal collector (appeals) has held that these would be classifiable in the tariff under heading 7404 as copper scrap and therefore the expression copper scrap appearing in the deemed credit order ought to include scrap of alloys of copper which, because of the predominance of copper are classifiable under chapter 74.2. it is contended in the appeal that the term copper scrap occurring in the deemed credit order refers only to copper and not to any alloy of copper. this was reiterated by the departmental representative. the entry indicates tariff heading 7404 against it. the heading in the notification has to be construed with reference to the definition of copper in the tariff in view and the tariff heading cited. the fact that two earlier headings mentioned in the appeal specify alloys in fact supports this view. those two headings relate to refined copper and copper alloys and unwrought aluminium refining or not. i therefore see no reason to interfere.

Full Judgment

1. The question for consideration in these 7 appeals is deemed Modvat credit on zinc and nickel silver. In the order impugned in the appeal Collector (Appeals) has held that these would be classifiable in the tariff under Heading 7404 as copper scrap and therefore the expression copper scrap appearing in the deemed credit order ought to include scrap of alloys of copper which, because of the predominance of copper are classifiable under Chapter 74.

2. It is contended in the appeal that the term copper scrap occurring in the deemed credit order refers only to copper and not to any alloy of copper. This was reiterated by the departmental representative. The entry indicates Tariff Heading 7404 against it. The heading in the notification has to be construed with reference to the definition of copper in the tariff in view and the tariff heading cited. The fact that two earlier headings mentioned in the appeal specify alloys in fact supports this view. Those two headings relate to refined copper and copper alloys and unwrought aluminium refining or not. I therefore see no reason to interfere.

Same Court & Year Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumb... Same Parties Commissioner of Central Excise vs Swill Ltd. Same Subject Excise