Home Case Index All Cases Central Excise Central Excise + AT Central Excise - 2018 (1) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2018 (1) TMI 204 - AT - Central ExciseClassification of goods - food preparations, namely, wheat flour, rice flour, corn crunch, rice crunch, etc. - Whether the goods in question are classifiable under chapter heading 1901.11 or under chapter heading 1901.19 or not? - Extended period of limitation - Difference of opinion on merit i.e. issue of classification but concurrent decision on the issue of period of limitation while setting aside the demand. Held that: - Per : Ashok Jindal - The intent of the legislature is not that the said goods were strictly used by the infant from the manufacturer or cannot be used by other industrial unit for further manufacture of the said goods for use of infant. The entry is quite clearly shows that the goods should be the food preparations put into unit container for infant use. Therefore the goods qualify for classification under chapter heading 1901.11 Therefore, on merits, we hold that the appellant has correctly classified the goods under chapter heading 1901.11. Per: Devender Singh - Admittedly, the products made by the appellant is an intermediate products which are not capable of being used by the infants as such nor are they marketed for infants. They are supplied to the industrial consumers to make it fit for infants. The impugned products are not fit for use of infants as such - capability of use of the products, marketability of the products and the actual supply of the products to industrial user show that the impugned products are not fit for infant use - the products in question, namely, extruded wheat/rice, flour wheat crunch, rice crunch, etc. would be correctly classifiable under tariff sub heading 1901.19. Time limitation - Held that: - the appellant has been filing regular declaration under Rule 173B of the Central Excise Act, 1944 - as the fact of declaration made by the appellant was in the knowledge of the Revenue in support of this evidence produced by the appellant which shows name of the buyer is an industrial consumer. In that circumstance, the extended period of limitation is not invokable as all the facts were in the knowledge of the department that the classification/declaration filed by the appellant is in respect of the goods under chapter heading 1901.11 - extended period not invocable. Since the entire period is beyond the normal period, I agree with the learned brother Member (J) in his conclusion that the appeal is to be allowed on limitation.
|