Sponsored
    Follow Us:

Case Law Details

Case Name : Asian Granito India Limited Vs. C.C.-Mundra (CESTAT Ahmedabad)
Appeal Number : Customs Appeal No. 11292 of 2017
Date of Judgement/Order : 25/08/2020
Related Assessment Year :
Become a Premium member to Download. If you are already a Premium member, Login here to access.
Sponsored

Asian Granito India Limited Vs. C.C.-Mundra (CESTAT Ahmedabad)

The issue under consideration is whether the Calcite Sand (Calcite Powder) is classifiable under CT 2503 9030 as mineral product or required to be classified under CTH 2836 5000 as a chemical?

CESTAT state that, the test reports of Kandla Customs Lab do not test all parameters as required under IS: 8767-1978, i.e. the Specification for Precipitated and activated Calcium Carbonate for Paints, and the range of Oil Absorption and other parameters (including particle size) are not found in the present case at all. The distinction sought to be made by the Ld. AR on behalf of the revenue, that the BE mentions calcite sand whereas calcite powder was the product imported in all these cases, does not have force. When minerals, both in lump or powder form, otherwise stand classified under Chapter 25, the very fact that imported goods in present case was “sand” and not “powder” may otherwise suggest that the goods in question was not precipitated Calcium Carbonate at all, since particle size is of great importance, apart from Oil Absorption ratio, in light of the various case laws relied upon by the Appellant. Under the circumstances, there is no option but to go by the technical data sheet/description provided by overseas supplier for the products in question. Nowhere the suppliers refer to the product to be of “Precipitated” form at all. In fact, the presence of other minerals, the Oil Absorption Ratio shown in the technical data sheet otherwise show that the product in question is not Precipitated and hence, the classification sought for by the Appellant under CTH 2503 9030 therefore has to be upheld. In view of our above findings, the differential duty demand, interest, fine and penal action is not sustainable. Hence the impugned order is set aside. Appeal is allowed with consequential reliefs, if any arise, in accordance with law.

FULL TEXT OF THE CESTAT JUDGEMENT

The issue involved is that whether the Calcite Sand (Calcite Powder) imported by the Appellant is classifiable under CT 2503 9030 as claimed by the Appellant or required to be classified under CTH 2836 5000 as confirmed vide the impugned order.

Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.

Sponsored

Join Taxguru’s Network for Latest updates on Income Tax, GST, Company Law, Corporate Laws and other related subjects.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Sponsored
Sponsored
Sponsored
Search Post by Date
August 2024
M T W T F S S
 1234
567891011
12131415161718
19202122232425
262728293031