2017 (3) TMI 989 - AT - Central Excise

Classification of C-4 raffinate (return stream) - whether the return stream product was not an input or partially processed input but a product that is classifiable under heading 2711.12 of the First Schedule to the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985? - Held that - The appeal itself is without any challenge to the legality and propriety of the impugned order - the adjudicating authority, conscious of the specific terms of the remand on the occasion of the former hearing in this very matter, did consider the final decision in the classification and complied thus with our earlier order - appeal dismissed - decided against appellant.

Summary

Issues:
Classification of 'C-4 raffinate (return stream)' with duty implication and exemption under specific notifications.

Analysis:
The dispute revolved around the classification of 'C-4 raffinate (return stream)' with a duty implication of ?94,87,425 for the period from March 2000 to June 2001. The appellant failed to file a classification list under rule 173B of Central Excise Rules, 1944, leading to the initiation of proceedings. The impugned order classified the product under heading 2711.12 of the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985, confirming duty liability and imposing a penalty. The matter was remanded by the Tribunal for awaiting the classification of the incoming stream, leading to another notice for duty recovery for a subsequent period.

The facts revealed that the input 'C-4 raffinate' was a mixture of hydrocarbons used in manufacturing 'polyisobutylene.' The appellant claimed classification under 'liquefied petroleum gases and other gaseous hydrocarbons,' contending that the product contained 83% of butylenes and should be classified under 2711.12. Additionally, the appellant argued for exemption under specific notifications, asserting that the goods were exempt under notification nos. 6/2000-CE and 3/2001-CE.

The Tribunal considered the composition of 'C-4 raffinate' and previous decisions regarding its classification. It was noted that the product was a mix of various isomers of butylenes and did not meet the purity requirement for classification under 2711.12. The adjudicating authority dropped proceedings based on this finding. The Revenue appealed this decision, disputing the Tribunal's classification and citing judgments from previous cases.

The Tribunal addressed the appeal, highlighting the Revenue's challenge to the Tribunal's decision in a related case. The Tribunal emphasized the importance of respecting legal decisions and criticized the Revenue's attempt to quash the Tribunal's decision. It noted that the impugned order had followed the Tribunal's classification and complied with previous directions. The Tribunal found no merit in the Revenue's appeal, as there were no contentions against the legality and propriety of the impugned order.

In conclusion, the Tribunal dismissed the Revenue's appeal, emphasizing the need to adhere to legal decisions and procedural proprieties. The appeal was disposed of, affirming the classification of 'C-4 raffinate' and the compliance with previous directions.