2024 (2) TMI 445 - AT - Customs

ReClassification of imported goods - calcite powder (uncoated) - to be classified under Chapter 26 or not - reliance on the test report of the laboratory without having facilities of testing the goods - HELD THAT - The identical case has been decided in the case of ACME MICRONISED MINERALS VERSUS C.C. -MUNDRA 2024 (1) TMI 965 - CESTAT AHMEDABAD wherein it was held that it is admitted that at the relevant time when the CRCL, Kandla has under taken the testing of imported goods in question i.e. Calcite Powder the said laboratory did not have the facilities to test such product. This Tribunal considering the very same fact came to conclusion that, when a particular laboratory does not have the testing facilities, the test report of the said laboratory without having facilities of testing the goods cannot be relied upon to decide the classification of the goods. There are no merit in the impugned order - The same is set aside and appeal is allowed.

Summary

Issues Involved:
1. Re-classification of the imported product.
2. Validity of the Chemical Examiners Report.
3. Compliance with High Court orders regarding the release of goods.

Summary:

Re-classification of the Imported Product:
The appeal was filed by OASIS IMPEX against the re-classification of calcite powder (uncoated) imported by them. The revenue reclassified the product based on the Chemical Examiners Report, which was contested by the appellant.

Validity of the Chemical Examiners Report:
The appellant argued that the Customs Laboratory lacked the facility to test "Precipitated Calcium Carbonate" at the material time, as per F.N. 401/243/2016-Cus-III dated 16.11.2017. The Tribunal referred to a similar case, Acme Micronised Minerals Vs. C.C., Mundra, where the test report was rejected due to the laboratory's lack of testing facilities. The Tribunal reiterated that a test report from a laboratory without the necessary facilities cannot be relied upon for classification purposes, citing multiple precedents including Gaurav Lubricants Industries Pvt. Ltd, Asian Granito India, and others.

Compliance with High Court Orders:
The appellant claimed that the department did not comply with the High Court's direction to release the goods despite furnishing a bank guarantee. The High Court had explicitly directed the release of goods provisionally upon furnishing the bank guarantee, which was not adhered to by the department. The Tribunal acknowledged the non-compliance but stated that any action regarding this should be taken by the High Court. However, it was noted that the appellant is entitled to the release of goods based on the merits of the case.

Conclusion:
The Tribunal set aside the impugned orders, stating that the test report from CRCL Vadodara/Delhi cannot be accepted due to the lack of testing facilities. The appellant's declaration regarding the nature, classification, and valuation of the goods was found to be correct. The appeal was allowed with consequential relief.