2009 (11) TMI 778

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... yur Shroff, Advocate, for the Respondent. ORDER There are two applications before us, both filed by the Revenue (appellant), one for condonation of delay and the other for stay of operation of the impugned order. After hearing both sides, we find that the Revenue s appeal is delayed by just 3 days. We condone this delay, having been satisfied with the explanation offered by the appellant. T .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... d compound and not as a fertiliser under Chapter 31. On the other hand, ld. counsel for the respondent submits that mono potassium phosphate is a fertiliser specified in the Fertiliser Control Order and also that it satisfies the description of CTH 3105. A chemical analysis report produced by the assessee from abroad shows that mono potassium phosphate is a fertiliser. The Fertiliser Control Order .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... Further, going by the description of the Heading 3105, we find that mineral or chemical fertiliser containing phosphorous and potassium are specifically covered by SH 3105 60 00. The Revenue has no case that the goods imported by the respondent is not of a kind used as fertiliser. The goods contained both phosphorous and potassium. It satisfies the description of the above sub-heading. Chapter Not .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X