2019 (9) TMI 278 - AT - Central Excise

Classification of goods - Megaboost - It was alleged by the Excise Authority that the said goods were not fertilizer as claimed by them before Customs Authority but are classifiable under Chapter 29 therefore, were liable to be assessed to duty - whether the product sold by the appellant is classifiable under chapter 31 as fertilizer or under chapter 29 specifically defined chemical? HELD THAT - It is seen that the Coordination Compound is a molecule consisting of metal item with numbers of other items or groups, thus it is separately defined chemical and not amixture of different items. In this context, Ld. Counsel for the appellant was asked to assist by providing the meaning of words Coordination Compound and the word Chelated appearing in Chapter Note 5 to Chapter 29 and in test report which Ld. Counsel refuse to give - the chelate is specifically separately defined chemical and not a mixture. The chemical examiner report clearly points out that the Chapter Note 5 (c) is relevant for the classification of the product as the said product has been describes by the chemical examiner as Coordination Compound . The literature of foreign supplier as well as the test reports produced by the appellant also describe prodyuct as chelated Iron or Chelated Zinc . It is seen that the decision in case of Ciba India Ltd 2008 (12) TMI 475 - CESTAT, CHENNAI was taken in respect of Ethylene Diamine Tetraacetic Acid (EDTA) which is on chelating agent and also contains Nitrogen, Zinc, Manganese and Iron. In the said case, the reliance has been placed on Note 6 of Chapter 31 of Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985 - It fails to notice that the Chapter 31 does not include separate chemically defined compounds. In respect of separately defined chemical, the chapter Notes permits classification under Chapter 31 only with reference to chapter 2(a), 3(a), 4(a) or 5 to Chapter 31. It is apparent that separately define chemical which may also answered to Note 6 to Chapter 31 would not be covered under Chapter 31. Moreover, it is seen that Chapter 29 covers all separate chemical define organics compound. The Note 2 of Chapter 29 excludes only Urea falling under heading 3102 or 3105 from the purview of Chapter 29. On combine reading of Chapter Note 1 of Chapter 29 and Chapter Note 2(e) of chapter 29, Chapter Note 1 (b) of Chapter 31 and Chapter Note 6 of Chapter 31 shows that separately define compound which might answer to Chapter 6 would not be classifiable under Chapter 31 - It is seen that the decision in case of Ciba India Ltd are per incurium as they have fail to examine the aforesaid Chapter Notes before reaching to conclusion. Whether it is open to Central Excise Authority to change the classification made by the Customs Authority? - HELD THAT - It is apparent that two authorities i.e. Customs and Excise Authority are totally independent authority and mistake by one need not be carried out or followed by another. Appeal dismissed.

Summary

Issues Involved:

1. Classification of the product 'Megaboost' under Chapter 31 or Chapter 29 of the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985.
2. Authority of Central Excise to reclassify goods previously classified by Customs.

Issue-wise Detailed Analysis:

1. Classification of the Product 'Megaboost':

The appellant, M/s Meghmani Organics Ltd, contested the classification of their product 'Megaboost', arguing it should fall under Chapter 31 as a fertilizer, not under Chapter 29 as a coordination compound. The product was initially classified under Chapter 31 by Customs during import, but the Excise Authority reclassified it under Chapter 29, leading to the denial of a refund claim for duties paid under protest.

The Excise Authority based its classification on chemical examination reports from the Central Excise Laboratory and the Central Revenue Control Laboratory, which identified 'Megaboost' as a coordination compound. The test results indicated that 'Megaboost FE' and 'Megaboost ZN' were ethylene diamine tetraacetic acid (EDTA) complexes with iron and zinc, respectively, and did not contain nitrogen, phosphorus, or potassium (NPK) based fertilizers.

The appellant challenged these findings, citing previous Tribunal decisions in Ciba India Ltd and their own case, where similar products were classified under Chapter 31. However, the Tribunal noted that these decisions did not consider Chapter Note 5 of the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985, which specifically addresses coordination compounds. The Tribunal emphasized that coordination compounds are defined chemicals and not mixtures, thus falling under Chapter 29.

The Tribunal also referred to the definition of coordination compounds and chelated compounds, reinforcing that 'Megaboost' is a separately defined chemical. The Tribunal concluded that the product does not meet the criteria for classification under Chapter 31, as it is not a mixture but a defined chemical compound, and thus should be classified under Chapter 29.

2. Authority of Central Excise to Reclassify Goods:

The appellant argued that once the Customs Authority classified the goods under Chapter 31, the Central Excise Authority should not change this classification. The Tribunal rejected this argument, stating that Customs and Excise Authorities are independent entities, and a mistake by one authority does not bind the other. The Central Excise Authority is within its rights to reclassify goods based on its findings and applicable laws.

Conclusion:

The Tribunal dismissed the appeal, upholding the classification of 'Megaboost' under Chapter 29 of the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985, and affirming the authority of the Central Excise to reclassify the goods independently of the Customs classification.