9911796707
TMI Blog1996 (9) TMI 342X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s had declared two products in their C/List. The first product was Kem Kerrier TCI Conc. and the second product was Kem Kerrier D. Conc. In their C/List, they had claimed classification of the above two products under sub-heading 3402.10 stating sulphonated castor oil and claimed that these products were leviable to duty at nil rate. Samples were drawn from these products and sent to Dy. Chief Chemist. The classification was approved provisionally. The Dy. Chief Chemist opined that the two products stated above are dyes carrier. The Asstt. Collector accordingly issued show cause notice asking the appellants to explain as to why the products should not be classified under sub-heading 3809.00 and levied to duty at 15% [ad valorem]. 3. The s ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e appellants also requested that the Dy. Chief Chemist may be requested to indicate whether the test laid down in Note 3 to Chapter 34 was carried out. After careful consideration of the submissions made, the A.C., in his order-in-original held that Kem Kerrier TCI Conc./D. Conc. is classifiable under sub-heading No. 3809.00 with 15% Adv. rate of duty. For classification of Azofast, the ld. A.C. held that it was classifiable under sub-heading No. 3402.90 with 20% adv. rate of duty upto 28-2-1987 and at a rate of 25% ad valorem from 1-3-1987 onwards. The A.C. also directed the appellants to pay duty payable on these products. The A.C. also approved the C.L. 5. Shri Gopal Prasad, the ld. Counsel appearing for the appellants submitted that t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s of law that the classification has to be adopted for a product in the shape it leaves the factory. In support of this contention, he cited and relied upon the Trade Notice No. 150/89 dated 28-4-1989 of Hyderabad Collectorate. In support of the contention that the products manufactured by them become dye carrier only when they are emulsified, the ld. Counsel cited and relied upon the page 79 of the book titled as Technology of Textile Processing by Shri V.A. Shenai. The ld. Counsel also contended that the A.C. has also ordered for recovery of duty whereas there was no show cause notice with reference to recovery of duty. It was also contended that the goods were not provisionally assessed. Summing up his arguments, the ld. Counsel submit ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 09.00. He submitted that once these products are classifiable under sub-heading No. 3809.00, the question of conducting the test in terms of Note 3 of Chapter 34 does not arise. The ld. SDR therefore, submitted that the lower authorities have rightly classified the goods. On the question of demand of duty, the ld. SDR submitted that the show cause notice specifically says that the products described as Kem Kerrier TCI Conc./D. Conc. attracts duty at a rate of 15% adv. and that the show cause notice in respect of Azofast also says that the product shall be classifiable under Chapter Heading 3402 attracting duty at 20% adv. that in pursuance of this show cause notice, the order-in-original confirms that the duty on Kem Kerrier TCI Conc./D.Con ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... aimed that the product is a dye carrier. Looking to the literature on the subject prepared by the appellants as also the opinion of the Dy. Chief Chemist, we have no hesitation in holding that the product is dye carrier and is classifiable under sub-heading 3809.00. A lot of emphasises was laid by the Counsel of the appellants that it was only an extract of the test report of the Dy. Chief Chemist which was communicated to them and they had no opportunity of seeing the full report of the Dy. Chief Chemist and thus they have been denied an opportunity of rebutting the report. The admitted position is that the extract of the Dy. Chief Chemist s report was sent to the appellants. If they had any objection, they should have followed the procedu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... taken in reply to the show cause notice was that on comparison of the above two competing entries, the product described as Azofast is a finishing agent and was correctly classifiable under sub-heading 3801.90. No additional evidence was brought on record nor any additional grounds were adduced before us for classification of this product under Chapter Heading 3801.90. We find that the Dy. Chief Chemist, in his test report found the item to be organic surface active agent and, therefore, the Asstt. Collector correctly held that it is classifiable under Chapter 34. Heading No. 34.02 reads : Organic surface active agents (other than soap) : surface active preparations, washing preparations etc. 3402.10 reads : Sulphonated castor oil, fish ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
