1997 (12) TMI 250 - AT - Central Excise

Summary

Issues: Department's appeal against order of Collector (Appeals) regarding excisability and classification of lubricant products.

The judgment pertains to a Department's appeal against the order of Collector (Appeals) regarding the excisability and classification of four lubricant products. The respondents had requested a transfer of the appeal to the Bombay Bench, which was not feasible due to administrative reasons. The Department argued that the products, including Mahamoli Dry Lubricant, should be classified under Tariff Item 68 and attract duty. The respondents contended that the products did not undergo a manufacturing process and should remain classified under Tariff Item 11B. The Collector (Appeals) had previously ruled in favor of the respondents, except for Mahamoli Dry Lubricant, which was deemed not dutiable. The Department challenged this decision, emphasizing the addition of ingredients to the products resulted in new dutiable items under Tariff Item 68.

The Tribunal analyzed the products individually. Concerning Mahamoli Dry Lubricant, the Department failed to demonstrate that the addition of anti-oxidant and rust inhibitors transformed the product into a new dutiable item. The Tribunal referenced expert sources describing MoS2 as a dry lubricant, supporting the Collector's decision. Additionally, the Chemical Examiner's report was not provided, and no evidence of a new product emerging was presented, leading to the dismissal of the Department's claim.

Regarding the other three products, the Tribunal referred to Tariff Entry 11B, which covers blended or compounded lubricants. The Board's Tariff Advice clarified cases exempt from duty under this entry, emphasizing the addition of mineral oils or ingredients triggering duty liability. The Tribunal upheld that these three products fell under Tariff Item 11B, making them dutiable during the relevant period. As the Department failed to present evidence justifying a change in classification to Tariff Item 68, the original classification under 11B was maintained. The order of the Collector (Appeals) was modified accordingly, and the appeal was disposed of in line with the Tribunal's findings.