TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2023 (5) TMI 938
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ated 17.03.2012 Sl. No. 115A. 2. The facts of the case are that the respondents filed various Bills of Entry for import of aluminous cement classifying the same under CTH 25233000 to claim the benefit of Notification No.21/2002-Cus dated 01.03.2002 Sl.No.448A and Notification No.12/2012-Cus dated 17.03.2012. After clearance of the goods, the DRI investigated the matter and on the basis of several statement of several trade and industrial technical data, the DRI come to the conclusion that alumina content in the imported cement was 40% and above and therefore, the said goods were correctly classifiable as High Alumina Refractory Cement and the same are to be classified under CTH 25239020 and the said item is not entitled for the benefit of ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ous cement, slag cement, supersulphate cement and similar hydraulic cements whether or not coloured or in the form of clinkers. 2523.10 -- Cement clinkers Portland cement 30% 2523.21 -- White cement, whether not artificially coloured 30% 2523.29 -- Other 30% 2523.30 -- Aluminous cement 30% 2523.90 -- Other hydraulic cements 30% From 2003-04, tariff heading has been modified as follows: 2523 Portland cement, aluminous cement, slag cement, supersulphate cement and similar hydraulic cements whether or not coloured or in the form of clinkers. 2523 10 00 -- Cement clinkers Portland cement 25% 2523 21 00 -- White cement, whet....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ractory cement has been created. It is undisputed that the alumina content in their cement was over 50%. He would assert that such high aluminium content is essential for manufacture of refractory bricks which are their final products. Low aluminous cement will not be suitable for manufacture of refractory bricks. On a specific query from the Bench, he explained that in their documents, the brand name of the products which they had imported has been indicated and they have claimed classification of aluminous cement as they have been doing for a long time. While the trade name suggests it is high aluminous cement, it may or may not be evident from the name itself. However, whenever they submitted the documents to the Customs along with bills....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....do not specify any particular sub-heading, regardless of where, in the Chapter, the aluminous cement imported by them falls and regardless of what the content of alumina is, they are entitled to the benefit of exemption notification. Therefore, the entire demand has been raised without any merit. Consequently, the penalties also do not sustain. 4. Learned A.R. reiterates the impugned order and submits that the appellant has been importing high alumina refractory cement falling under Chapter Heading 2523.90 20 and have been mis-declaring it was aluminous cement classifying it under 2523.30 00 and wrongly availing the benefit of Notification No. 21/2002 (Sl No. 448A-Cus) dated 01.03.2002. Representative samples of the imported material were....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... classifying these products as aluminous cement under Chapter 25. It is also not in dispute that they have not changed their classification to high alumna refractory cement after the Tariff has been revised with effect from 2003-04. It is also not in dispute that the goods were declared by the trade name and necessary documents were produced along with bills of entry by the appellant. The documents which were produced at the time of assessment and presented before us during the current proceedings show that the certificate of quality was among the documents presented. These certificates of quality clearly indicate the alumina content. In all cases the alumina content is over 50%. The only point of allegation that can sustain in the present ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....our mind that what was imported was aluminous cement for the purpose of manufacture of refractory bricks. Therefore, the exemption Notification No. 21/2002 is fully available to the appellant. Accordingly, the demand on this count even within the normal period of limitation does not sustain. 7. As we have found that there was no mis-declaration at all and the appellant is entitled for the exemption notification in any case and there is nothing to be gained by the appellant by classifying their product under one heading or the other, we find the confiscation of the goods and imposition of penalties are also not sustainable and need to be set aside and we do so." 5. We find that in this case also, the respondent has imported Alumina Cement....