Home Case Index All Cases Customs Customs + AT Customs - 2021 (12) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2021 (12) TMI 633 - AT - CustomsClassification of imported goods - Reformate - classification was rejected and goods classified under CTH 2710 12 19 - whether the goods to be classified under CTH 2710 12 19 or under CTH 2707 50 00? - HELD THAT:- The Adjudicating Authority dealt with this issue and accepted the contention of the appellant that the term “similar products” used in chapter Heading 2707 also includes products obtained by processing of petroleum as the said Explanatory Notes explain the classification of “similar products” obtained from distillation of coal tar and includes processing of petroleum. This part of the finding recorded by the Adjudicating Authority has not been assailed by the Department - if the product Reformate is classifiable under the four digit Heading CTH 2707, it would not be really material to determine as to under which eight digit Sub-Heading it can be classified because the duty rate structure is the same for all the Sub-Heads. The Adjudicating Authority, therefore, committed an error in thereafter holding that the product Reformate would be classifiable under CTH 2710 12 19. Whether the product Reformate merits classification under CTH 2707 50 00? - HELD THAT:- The Notification dated 11.07.2014 was issued and it is the position emerging from the issuance of this Notification that has been clarified by the TRU Circular. Merely because the Circular states that the Annexure only provide a summary of the changes made and should not be used in any quasi- judicial or judicial proceedings would not in any manner dilute the position emerging from the Notification that has been explained in the Circular. Whether the product Reformate would merit classification under CTH 2710? - HELD THAT:- Reformate is a highly rich aromatic product containing 80% or more aromatic content. It cannot, therefore, be covered under category (C) and accordingly, from the purview of CTH 2710 as well. This is for the reason that all the products covered by category (C) must contain, in addition to the substances added, at least 70% of petroleum oils covered by categories (A) and (B). Thus, even if the substances added for making the preparations are considered to be all aromatic in nature, the preparations, by virtue of at least having 70% of categories (A) and (B) oils therein must have 35% non-aromatic constituents (70% of 50%). Thus, the aromatic content at best would be 65% in the preparation of the kind covered under category (C). Reformate, however has 80% aromatic contents and, therefore, cannot be considered under category (C) - from a plain language of the expression “preparations not elsewhere specified or included, containing by weight of 70% or more of petroleum oils, these oils being the basic constituents of the preparations’, it is evident that even if it is assumed that Reformate is a preparation, still it will not be classifiable under CTH 2710 as the said Heading specifically excludes preparations which are elsewhere specified or included. It needs to be remembered that Reformate is specifically covered under CTH 2707 and at 8-digit level under CTH 2707 50 00. Whether Reformate can be classified under CTH 2710 12 19 as “other motor spirit”? - HELD THAT:- What needs to be noted is that the Adjudicating Authority has observed that it would not like to place reliance on the classification practice followed in other countries, apart from USA and, therefore, reference to the Customs Tariff of UAE and Singapore would be beyond the scope of the impugned order. Learned special counsel for the Department also contended that the appellant has not adduced any evidence to prove that the flash point of Reformate is not below 25ºC - this contention is also not only beyond the scope of the impugned order, but even otherwise, it was for the Revenue to substantiate that the flash point of Reformate was below 25ºC. Reformate would merit classification under CTH 2707 50 00 and not under CTH 2710 12 19 - appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant.
|