2007 (7) TMI 154 - AT - Central Excise

Samples taken of zinc dross from zinc bath On basis of test reports classified the goods under Heading 7901.20 to confirm higher rate of duty Samples must have been taken from storage yard or from buyers end Held that appellants are given benefit of doubt so product is classifiable under 26.19

Summary

Issues: Classification of zinc dross for duty payment.

In this judgment by the Appellate Tribunal CESTAT, KOLKATA, the issue revolved around the classification of zinc dross for duty payment by the appellants who used zinc in their galvanizing line. The appellants argued that the test reports relied on by the Department were related to samples taken from the zinc bath for maintaining zinc concentration, not the zinc dross obtained in the galvanizing process. The Ld. Advocate highlighted that the zinc dross should be classified under a different heading and that duty payment was not required based on previous court decisions. The Department did not dispute that the test reports were from the zinc bath and did not take independent samples of the zinc dross.

The Tribunal noted that the Department did not refute the appellants' contention regarding the origin of the test reports. As a result, the Tribunal held that the impugned order confirming a higher duty rate for the zinc dross under a specific heading was not sustainable. The Tribunal found in favor of the appellants, stating that they should be given the benefit of doubt as the Department failed to provide evidence to counter the appellants' claims. Therefore, the impugned order was set aside, and the appeal was allowed. The judgment emphasizes the importance of proper classification based on evidence and the need for the Department to address and refute the arguments raised by the appellants to uphold duty payment decisions.