9911796707
TMI Blog1997 (12) TMI 229X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... per : P.C. Jain, Member (T)]. Question involved in the present matters is a question of classification of a product known as Pitch-Creosote Mixture (P.C.M.). We observe from the Assistant Commissioner s clear finding regarding the aforesaid product i.e. P.C.M., that it is only a partially distilled tar. Therefore, it does not follow that P.C.M. is the same thing as tar. He also found that c ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... o classification for the subsequent period and demand of duty thereon. The predecessor Assistant Commissioner (as referred to in Appeal No. E-4003/89) decided the same classification under the new Tariff under sub-heading 2708.11 instead of 2706.00 as claimed by the appellants. 4. In order to appreciate the controversy, we reproduce below the Tariff Headings 27.06 and 27.08 respectively :- ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ar. It has been found by the Assistant Commissioner as mentioned above, that the present product under consideration is a partially distilled tar. Therefore, on the plain reading, the product before us i.e. P.C.M., would fall under Tariff sub-heading 2706.00. At this stage, learned JDR, Shri R.K. Roy draws attention to the composition of P.C.M. which reads as follows :- Pitch - 63 to 65% Ligh ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... a result of partial distillation of tar and therefore, it is a partially distilled tar as admitted by the adjudicating authority referred to above. Therefore, in our view, the product falls under 2706.00. Once it is taken to fall under the Tariff Heading 2706.00 as held above, the question of benefit of the Notifications in question, does not arise because the rate of duty is nil, as contended by ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
