2014 (10) TMI 441

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... e of the Department. Moreover, in the pouches in which the products are sold, it is stated “All these micronutrients play a very significant role in physiological growth and biochemical process of crop/plants”. This label also does not support the case of the Revenue since it does not say that the products are plant growth regulators. In fact it supports the case of the appellant that is a mixture of micronutrients. Learned AR also relied upon the decision of this Tribunal in the case of Karnataka Agro Chemicals v. CCE, Bangalore [2012 (11) TMI 865 - CESTAT, BANGALORE]. However, in that case the product contained Urea, Calcium Nitrate, Potassium Nitrate, Zinc Sulphate, Magnesium Sulphate, Manganese Sulphate, Ferrous Sulphate, Copper Sulphat .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... repacking of single micronutrients as amounting to manufacture. This demand is not being contested. The same has been accepted and duty with interest has been paid. 3. As regards the demand on reclassification, on going through the records and hearing both sides, we find that 33 samples were drawn on four occasions and sent to the Chemical Examiner on 2 occasions and 3rd time to the Acharya N.G. Ranga Agricultural University, Hyderabad. However, none of the reports categorically say that the products are plant growth regulators. The Chemical Examiner said on the first occasion the macro and micronutrients are required by plants for proper growth . On the second occasion, the Chemical Examiner stated As per Fertiliser Control Order (FC .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... upport the case of the Revenue since it does not say that the products are plant growth regulators. In fact it supports the case of the appellant that is a mixture of micronutrients. Learned AR also relied upon the decision of this Tribunal in the case of Karnataka Agro Chemicals v. CCE, Bangalore [2012 (281) E.L.T. 607 (Tri.-Bang.)]. However, in that case the product contained Urea, Calcium Nitrate, Potassium Nitrate, Zinc Sulphate, Magnesium Sulphate, Manganese Sulphate, Ferrous Sulphate, Copper Sulphate, Borax, Boric acid and others. The products are not comparable. 4. The sum and substance of the above observations is that the issue involved is classification of the product which requires a detailed study of manufacturing process and .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X