9911796707
TMI Blog1994 (8) TMI 102X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... this product is not premix but are derivatives of Vitamin C, and therefore, held it to be classifiable under sub-heading 2936.27 of the CTA, 1975, as derivatives of Vitamin C and not under sub-heading 2309.00 of the CTA, 75, as premixes meant for use in animal feed. 3. The ld. Collector has noted in his order the report of the Deputy Chief Chemist vide T.O. No. 250 dated 12-10-1992 and the literature relied by the importer and basing on the said material has held that the goods are not premix and hence not classifiable as a preparation of a kind, used in the animal feed. 4. When the case came up for hearing, the appellant has sent in their written submission and has desired their case to be heard on merits. 5. Relying on the literatur ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ise, New Delhi as reported in 1994 (72) E.L.T. 197. They also submit that there is a conflict between the judgment rendered in the case of Ranbaxy with that of the judgment rendered in the case of Glaxo India Ltd. v. CCE as reported in 1992 (60) E.L.T. 124 on the scope and interpretation of Chapter Note 23 and hence the matter is required to be resolved by a Larger Bench. In their reply dated 9-11-1992 to a query raised by the Asstt. Collector by his Memo No. 32019 dated 2-11-1992, the appellant had submitted that Heading 2936.27 refers to `Vitamin C and its derivatives , and that this item is not a Vitamin C. It is a composition of Vitamin C and Phosphates and therefore, relying on the HSN Explanatory Notes, they have submitted that what i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... both the sides and have perused the written submissions including the product literature, the report of the Dy. Chief Chemical Examiner and the citation referred before us. The appellants have raised a ground of denial of principles of natural justice in this case inasmuch as it is their submission that a copy of the Dy. Chief Chemist s report has not been furnished to them. It is also their plea that the case has been decided without giving them hearing and therefore, they plead for remanding this matter, besides making a plea that there is a conflict between the two citations of the Tribunal and it is required to be referred to the Larger Bench. The ld. JDR has submitted that Chapter 23 under which the appellants are seeking classificati ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
