Per P.C. Jain :

In these appeals the short question is whether the Spent Sulphuric Acid is liable to duty or not under tariff heading 3402.90. Ld. Advocate appearing for the appellant in appeal no. 1 and for the respondents in appeal no. 2 submits that the main question now is whether the said product Spent Sulphuric Acid can be treated as 'goods' and a 'manufactured product'. He submits that it has been held by the Tribunal in relation to this very product in the case of CCE, New Delhi Vs. Aureola Chemicals Pvt. Ltd. 1998 (26) RLT 540 that the said product is not a result of manufacture and are not 'goods' as commonly known and understood in the trade and accordingly there is no duty liability on the said product. He submits that this is the latest judgement of the Tribunal relying on the well known propositions of law of the Apex Court. He therefore, prays for allowing his appeal in appeal no. 1 and dismissing the Revenue's appeal in appeal no. 2.

2. Opposing the contention, Ld. SDR Shri H.K. Jain for the Revenue submits that the judgement of the Tribunal in the case of DCW Ltd. Vs. CCE, Madurai 1995 (10) RLT 432 (T) = 1996 (81) ELT 381 is in favour of the Revenue.

3. We have c