Home Case Index All Cases Central Excise Central Excise + AT Central Excise - 2019 (9) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2019 (9) TMI 278 - AT - Central ExciseClassification of goods - Megaboost - It was alleged by the Excise Authority that the said goods were not fertilizer as claimed by them before Customs Authority but are classifiable under Chapter 29 therefore, were liable to be assessed to duty - whether the product sold by the appellant is classifiable under chapter 31 as fertilizer or under chapter 29 specifically defined chemical? HELD THAT:- It is seen that the ‘Coordination Compound’ is a molecule consisting of metal item with numbers of other items or groups, thus it is separately defined chemical and not amixture of different items. In this context, Ld. Counsel for the appellant was asked to assist by providing the meaning of words ‘Coordination Compound’ and the word ‘Chelated’ appearing in Chapter Note 5 to Chapter 29 and in test report which Ld. Counsel refuse to give - the chelate is specifically separately defined chemical and not a mixture. The chemical examiner report clearly points out that the Chapter Note 5 (c) is relevant for the classification of the product as the said product has been describes by the chemical examiner as ‘Coordination Compound’. The literature of foreign supplier as well as the test reports produced by the appellant also describe prodyuct as ‘chelated Iron’ or Chelated Zinc’. It is seen that the decision in case of Ciba India Ltd [2008 (12) TMI 475 - CESTAT, CHENNAI] was taken in respect of Ethylene Diamine Tetraacetic Acid (EDTA) which is on chelating agent and also contains Nitrogen, Zinc, Manganese and Iron. In the said case, the reliance has been placed on Note 6 of Chapter 31 of Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985 - It fails to notice that the Chapter 31 does not include separate chemically defined compounds. In respect of separately defined chemical, the chapter Notes permits classification under Chapter 31 only with reference to chapter 2(a), 3(a), 4(a) or 5 to Chapter 31. It is apparent that separately define chemical which may also answered to Note 6 to Chapter 31 would not be covered under Chapter 31. Moreover, it is seen that Chapter 29 covers all separate chemical define organics compound. The Note 2 of Chapter 29 excludes only Urea falling under heading 3102 or 3105 from the purview of Chapter 29. On combine reading of Chapter Note 1 of Chapter 29 and Chapter Note 2(e) of chapter 29, Chapter Note 1 (b) of Chapter 31 and Chapter Note 6 of Chapter 31 shows that separately define compound which might answer to Chapter 6 would not be classifiable under Chapter 31 - It is seen that the decision in case of Ciba India Ltd are per incurium as they have fail to examine the aforesaid Chapter Notes before reaching to conclusion. Whether it is open to Central Excise Authority to change the classification made by the Customs Authority? - HELD THAT:- It is apparent that two authorities i.e. Customs and Excise Authority are totally independent authority and mistake by one need not be carried out or followed by another. Appeal dismissed.
|