2024 (4) TMI 701 - AT - Customs

Seeking to change the classification of the product imported by the appellant - WAXSOL-911(A) grade - to be classified under the heading 2710 or under 3405? - HELD THAT - The dispute involved in the instant case is identical to the dispute involved in the case decided in PANOLI INTERMEDIATES INDIA PVT LTD AND OTHERS VERSUS C.C. -KANDLA 2023 (6) TMI 317 - CESTAT AHMEDABAD . In the said decision after examining the dispute the tribunal observed A detailed examination about the nature of product, its usage and its proper classification based upon exclusion clauses of HSN explanatory note is warranted including of consideration of chapter 2712. In view of claim of product being in the nature of Slag wax, same needs elaborate discussion and findings from the authority below. It is seen that the matter was remanded to the original adjudicating authority for fresh adjudication on the ground that the adjudicating authority needs to give his own finding on the issue of classification and also various other issues mentioned - it is felt that this matter should also be remanded back to the original adjudicating authority or identical terms as in order above, to be decided a fresh. Appeal allowed by way of remand.

Summary

Issues involved: Classification of imported product u/s 2710 or 3405, Delay in adjudication despite tribunal order.

Classification Issue:
The appeal was filed against an order seeking to change the classification of the imported product. The appellant claimed the goods under Tariff Heading 2710, but the DRI's chemical examiner opined that the goods should be classified under 3405. The tribunal noted that the product, Waksol-911(A) grade, was an Industrial Raw Material for the manufacture of Chlorinated Paraffin Wax and could not be covered under Tariff Heading 3405. The tribunal emphasized the need for a detailed examination of the product's nature, usage, and proper classification, including consideration of chapter 2712. It was highlighted that the department must establish the predominant or common usage of the product, not merely based on possibility. The tribunal allowed the appeal by way of remand, directing the adjudicating authority to determine the exact nature and usage of the product imported, without being influenced by the classification indicated by the chemical analyst. The matter was remanded for fresh adjudication, emphasizing the importance of the adjudicating authority giving their own findings on the issue of classification.

Delay in Adjudication Issue:
Despite a previous tribunal order directing the lower authorities to decide the matter within three months, the matter was still pending. The counsel for the appellant expressed concern over the delay in adjudication and highlighted the suffering caused by the prolonged process. In response to this, the tribunal directed the adjudicating authority to decide the issue within four months from the date of the order, ensuring due notice and following the principles of natural justice.