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

2007 (2) TMI 19

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... t the appellant's products are not plant growth promoter carrying on nil rate of duty. The Commissioner (A) after detailed examination of the matter including the Apex Court's. decision upheld the assessee's contention that the item produced by them was plant growth promoter falling under Chapter Heading 31.01.00. In this regard, he has relied on technical information found in the Book on Plant Physiology 4th Edition by Robert M. Devlin and Francis H. Witham. He has also referred to the definition of the terms found in the book of J. C. Johnson He has also considered the HSN Explanatory Notes besides the Chemical Examiner's report. The findings given by the Commissioner (A) in Para 5 is reproduced herein below. 5. I have carefully gone th .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... process in plants. All the above literatures cited seem to be converging on the point covered by the HSN Note. They indicate that PGRS are natural or synthetic organic compounds other than nutrients and that, when applied in small amounts, they can alter physiological processes in plants. In the instant case, the adjudicating authority had no case that "Cheminocel" could inhibit or otherwise modify (apart from promoting) plant processes. The appellant's plea that the product contained only amino acids and other nutrients and, therefore, only promoted plant growth has not been successfully dislodged in the Additional Commissioner's order. The appellant's product 'Cheminocel' and other such products contained nutrients and only promoted plan .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... es enzymic activity". Further, the Hon'ble Supreme Court decision in the case of Ranadey Micronutrients v. CCE reported in 1996 (87) E.L.T. 19 (S.C.) held that "micro-nutrients were appropriately classifiable under Chapter 31 of the Central Excise Tariff Schedule. The appellants' products also contained micro-nutrients and hence the same should be classified only under Chapter 31. I have seen the chemical report furnished by the Joint Director of Central Revenue Laboratory. Customs House, Chennai vide letter L.Cx.S.29/77/2004 dated 30-11-2004. The report reads as "it is seen from literature forwarded that cheminocel SP is composed of mixture of Amino Acids. The salient features of the sample as stated on the packing are, (i) increased crop .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... xture of Amino Acids - Soluble Powder, Hydrolised Proteins Mixture (Mixture of Amino Acids) Granules and Hydrolised Proteins Mixture (Mixture of Amino Acids) - Soluble Liquid. We have analysed the contents of the above 3 samples. Based on this, we furnish the following for your kind perusal. The referred samples are a protein hydrolysate of vegetable/plant origin. In the past we con ducted experiments on agricultural crops at our farm to test protein hydrolysate for drawing efficacy; phytotoxicity and compatibility and also we tested them for toxicity in mammalian species. Our field cop efficacy studies have unequivocally demonstrated that the said protein hydrolysates when applied at foliar sprays can enhance the growth of the crops thus r .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... E- 1996 (87) E.L.T. 19 (S.C.) as noted in the order. It is submitted that the assessee did not produce literature of the products nor any reports of the Chemical Examiner to prove their contention that the product contents nutrients, therefore, they attempt to distinguish the Apex Court judgment. The other judgments referred to by the Commissioner (A) are also being attempting to distinguish in the grounds of appeal. In the grounds of the appeal, it is the contention of the revenue that the item is a plant growth regulator and to be classified under specific Chapter Heading 38.08.20. 3. We have heard the learned JDR who argued in extenso and also learned Counsel. 4. We have carefully perused the findings extracted above and the enti .....

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