9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
1988 (5) TMI 248 - AT - Central Excise
Issues: Classification of the product "Stabilizer OS 25" under Customs Tariff Schedule, exclusion of landing charges from assessable value, charging additional duty of customs only on CIF value.
The appeal was filed against the rejection of the claim by the Collector of Customs (Appeals) Madras regarding the classification of the product "Stabilizer OS 25" and other related issues. The appellants claimed that the product should be classified under Heading 34.01/07(3) of the Customs Tariff Schedule or alternatively under Heading 38.01/19(1). The lower authorities rejected the claim on all three grounds presented by the appellants. During the hearing, the appellants dropped the claims related to the exclusion of landing charges and charging additional duty of customs only on CIF value, focusing solely on the classification issue. The product in question, described as a foam stabilizer, was found to be a thick colorless liquid based on Silicones with surface active properties. The appellants argued for the classification based on recent Tribunal decisions, stating that the product was not covered under Central Excise Notification No. 208/69. The respondent agreed that the Tribunal decisions applied to the case and suggested remanding the matter to the lower authorities for further determination. After considering the submissions, the Tribunal concluded that there was no need to remand the matter as all necessary facts were available on record. Referring to previous Tribunal decisions, it was established that only silicone in its primary states would fall under specific tariff items. Since the product was a silicone-based complex organic compound with surface active properties, the correct classification was determined to be under Heading 34.01/07(3) of the Customs Tariff Schedule, contrary to the Department's contention. Therefore, the orders of the lower authorities were set aside, and the appeal was allowed in favor of the appellants, granting them consequential relief.
|
