2008 (9) TMI 664 - AT - Central Excise

Summary

Issues: Classification of chemical product under Central Excise Tariff Act.

Analysis:
1. The case involved the classification of two chemical products, Indrox 985 P-12 and Indrox 9 PR 12, manufactured by the appellants. The dispute arose regarding the correct classification of these products under the Central Excise Tariff Act.

2. The department contended that Indrox 985 P-12, a dye penetrant, should be classified under CET sub-heading 3204.30 as "synthetic organic products of a kind used as fluorescent brightening agents or as luminophores," rather than under CET sub-heading 3823.00 as claimed by the assessee.

3. The Assistant Collector of Central Excise approved the classification list, placing the dye penetrant under CET sub-heading 3204.90, attracting specific duty rates. The Collector of Central Excise (Appeals) and the Commissioner (Appeals) also upheld this classification.

4. The appellants argued for a decision on merits, leading to a detailed examination of the classification criteria under Chapter 32 of the Central Excise Tariff Act.

5. The Tribunal analyzed Note 2 to Chapter 32, which covers preparations based on colouring matters used in various applications. The HSN Explanatory Notes to Heading 32.04 provided further insights into the classification of synthetic organic colouring matter and related products.

6. Technical information presented by the appellants demonstrated the usage of the product as a dye penetrant on metal surfaces, highlighting the presence of colouring matter and fluorescent agents in the product. The product's characteristics and application aligned with the criteria specified under Heading 32.04.

7. The Tribunal concluded that the product in dispute was a preparation based on colouring matter containing both colouring matter and a fluorescent agent. Applying the relevant provisions of the Central Excise Tariff Act and the HSN Explanatory Notes, the product was rightly classified under CET sub-heading 3204.90.

8. Consequently, the Tribunal upheld the previous classification and rejected the appeal, emphasizing the correct application of the classification criteria under the Central Excise Tariff Act.

This detailed analysis of the judgment highlights the thorough examination of the classification criteria, technical characteristics of the product, and the application of relevant provisions to determine the correct classification under the Central Excise Tariff Act.