Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

2000 (10) TMI 771

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... CSH 3005.30 at NIL rate of duty instead of CSH 3003.10 attracting duty @ 16%, for the period March 99 to August 99. The Adjudicating Authority then adjudicated the case. Aggrieved by the Order-in-Original the appellants have filed the appeal with this office on Jan., 2000 with Stay Application. 3. Vide the Order on Stay passed on 7-6-2000 the then Commissioner (Appeals) Pune had directed the appellants to execute bond for the full duty and penalty and support the same with Bank Guarantee of Rs. 2.5 lacs, which the appellants have complied with. Then the Personal Hearing in the case was held on 22-9-2000, before me. Shri Pratap Gawade appeared on behalf of the appellants and reiterated the submissions made in the appeal petition. At t .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... the burden of classification is on the revenue. On the question of classification under Tariff Heading 3005.30 Shri Gawade submitted that some other manufacturers of ORS with their brand name have been clearing the item in the same Tariff Heading 3005.30 and their jurisdictional Central Excise authority has not raised any objection in this regard. He cited the case of M/s. Cipla Ltd. of Mumbai who manufacture similar item with brand name Prolyte. He produced a copy of the declaration signed in Pt. III by Cipla Ltd. in this regard. He also submitted that M/s Fairdeal Corporation of Aurangabad manufacture similar item under their brand name and clears the goods under heading 3005.30. He further argued that in Chapter 30 it is nowhere written .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ill get classified in CH 30.03 and ORS without a brand name will get excluded from CH 30.03. (2) Relying upon Chapter Note 3 of Chapter 30, he has explained that branded oral rehydration salt does not figure in items (a) to (h) of the aforesaid Chapter Note 3 and therefore it gets excluded from CH 30.05. 5. I have carefully examined the tariff headings, chapter notes and HSN Explanatory Notes. First of all, it has to be appreciated that CH 30.03 covers Medicaments; out of Medicaments, those with brand name will fall under CSH 3003.10, and those without brand name will fall under CSH 3003.20. If ORS is to be classified as Medicaments, then the branded ORS should fall under CSH 3003.10 and the unbranded ORS should fall under CSH 3003. .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... see whether the branded ORS is excluded from the purview of ORS described in CSH 3005.30, by any chapter note. In this case it is not. After confirming this, I do not have to see whether it figures in the expanded list of items under CH 30.05 in terms of Chapter note 3. In fact I observe that this Chapter note 3 has been lifted from chapter note 4 of Ch 30 of HSN. Chapter note 4 of HSN deals with CH 30.06 which is equivalent to our tariff CH 30.05. The CH 30.06 of HSN does not contain any sub-heading for ORS and that is the reason why ORS does not figure in the list of items described in Chapter Note 4 of Ch 30 of HSN. In our tariff, we introduced ORS under CSH 3005.30 in the budget for 1997-98. But obviously through inadvertence we have .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates