9911796707
TMI Blog2007 (4) TMI 454X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... case is regarding the importability of the chemical DICHLONE . The appellant classified the imported chemical under sub-heading No. 2921.4290 as chemical item. The revenue was of the opinion that the item is correctly classified under Heading 3808, for the reason that the said item DICHLONE is included in the Schedule to the Insecticides Act, 1968, hence registration from the Central Committee Insecticides Board is compulsory. It is on record that on the date of import of these goods, the appellant had no Registration from the Insecticides Board. The said consignment was seized and the appellants waived issuance of show cause notice and participated in the proceedings before the Adjudicating Authority who ordered for confiscation and im ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rom the Insecticides Board. The appellant has not produced any Registration of the Insecticides Board when the consignment was imported. The Central Board of Excise Customs vide Circular No. 61/2004-Cus., dated 28-10-2004 has at Para 4 intimated as under :- Attention in this regard is invited to Board s Circular No. 727/43/2003-CX, dated 29-7-2003 [2003 (156) E.L.T. T3] wherein the decision of the Hon ble Supreme Court in the case of Union of India v. Pesticides Manufacturing Formulators Association of India, 2002 (146) E.L.T. 19 (S.C.), was communicated to the field formations. The Apex Court has held that even in respect of a separately chemically defined compound, if it is a pesticide/insecticide it will be classified under Headi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 7) E.L.T. 907 (Tribunal) In all these cases the Tribunal has seen it fit to reduce the quantum of fine on the observation that the importers were actual users. We accordingly reduce the fine from Rs. 20 lakhs to Rs. 15 lakhs. Subject to this notification the appeal is rejected. 7. As regards the charge of mis-declaration of consignment, I find that the appellant was guided by the fact that very same item was available in the local market under Chapter Heading 2914.90 though this cannot be used as insecticides, it seems that there is no mala fide intention to declare the goods under Chapter 2921.4290 instead of 3808. As such I find that the redemption fine imposed on the appellant seems to be on the higher side. In the facts and circums ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
