2017 (7) TMI 516 - AT - Central Excise

Classification of goods - Edible preparation - whether classifiable under Chapter Heading No.2108.00 or under Chapter Sub Heading No.1901.92 of Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985? - Held that - under Chapter Heading No. 19.01 the title of the heading includes food preparations containing Malt Extract and containing Cocoa less than 40% by weight. The said goods are divided through single dash in two categories, one category is put up in unit containers and the other category is others . 1901.92 is sub set through double dash of others . It is a fact on record that the goods manufactured by the respondent are put up in unit containers. Therefore, obviously they will not fall in the category others which includes 1901.92 - appeal dismissed - decided against Revenue.

Summary

Issues: Classification of goods under Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985

Analysis:
The appeal involved the classification of goods by the respondent under Chapter Heading No.2108.00 with a claimed abatement of 40% on MRP, while the Revenue contended that the goods should be classified under Chapter Sub Heading No.1901.92, with a lower abatement of 35% on MRP. The Original Authority had issued an Order-in-Original confirming the demand and penalty, which was set aside by the learned Commissioner (Appeals) in the impugned Order-in-Appeal No.53/CE/2008. The Revenue appealed to the Tribunal against this decision.

The Revenue argued that the product in question, CALGAIN, based on Malt Extract containing Cocoa, specifically falls under Sub Heading No.1901.92 of the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985, which deals with food preparations containing Malt or Malt Extract or Cocoa Powder in any proportion. They relied on the rule that the heading which is more specific should be preferred over a general description. The Revenue highlighted the specific description under Heading No.19.01 and Sub Heading No.1901.92 to support their classification argument.

Upon hearing the arguments, the Tribunal noted that under Chapter Heading No.19.01, the goods in question are categorized as either 'put up in unit containers' or 'others,' with 1901.92 falling under the 'others' category. Since the goods manufactured by the respondent were indeed put up in unit containers, they did not fall under the 'others' category, including 1901.92. Therefore, the Tribunal found no merit in the Revenue's argument and dismissed the appeal, upholding the Order-in-Appeal dated 31.03.2008.

In conclusion, the Tribunal's decision was based on the specific categorization of goods under the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985, and the absence of the respondent's goods in the category that included Sub Heading No.1901.92. The judgment clarified the classification criteria and upheld the Order-in-Appeal that favored the respondent in this case.