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

2016 (9) TMI 132

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... s Parth Rasayan Pvt. Ltd.; and M/s Shriran Petrochem Industries and ld. DR, Sh. R. K. Manjhi for the Revenue, the respondent namely Commissioner, Central Excise, Indore. 2. The matter here concerns mainly with the classification of the item namely Residual Crude Petroleum Oil (RCPO)/ Residual Fuel Oil (RFO) / Residual Bottom Oil (RBO). The Commissioner through his respective impugned orders-in-original held the classification of the item commonly called RCPO/ RFO / and RCBO under chapter heading 27101950 of the First Schedule to the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985. Ld. Advocates submitted that the right classification for this item is 27090000 as Petroleum Crude Oil and inter alia plead as follows: (i) The Residual Crude Petroleum Oil (R .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... y material cannot be considered as Petroleum Oils other than crude. Hence, its use a fuel cannot be a clinching factory to conclude its classification under the Heading 27.10. Reliance is placed in this context on the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Ltd. vs. UOI 1999 (112) ELT 8 (SC.) (vii) In para 7.9 of the notice, it has been stated that as per the test report of Chief Chemical Examiner, CRCL, New Delhi the flash point of crude oil is 25 deg. C whereas the flash point of residual crude petroleum oil/ residual waste oil is 40 deg. C. which is mineral hydrocarbon oil. It has therefore been contended that the same has the characteristics of Fuel Oil . The department did not mention the flas .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ubject item are using it as fuel oil in the boilers, furnace of ceramic industries and is also used in hot mix plant. 4. In case of these three appellants in addition to the issue of classification, we find that there have been some shortage/ excess of goods namely ligroin and RCPO/ RWO in case of M/s Shrirang Petro Industries; the items namely Parson and Parsol 20 in case of M/s Parth Rasayan Pvt. Ltd.; the items namely Rudosol -1 and mixed fuel oil in case of M/s Rudraksha Petrochem Pvt. Limited. In case of M/s Parth Rasayan Pvt. Limited unaccounted goods valued at Rs. 70,801/- were confiscated and option given to redeem on payment of fine of Rs. 10,000/-. In the case of M/s Rudraksha Petrochem Pvt. Limited on the shortage found, duty of .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... em in the Supplementary Note (8) to Chapter Note 27. 5.2 Further, department has not made any efforts to go beyond the detailed classification 27101950 as fuel oil decided by the impugned order in favour of subject item. After having gone through the facts on record and submissions of both the sides, we find that the item is being used as a fuel but its mere use as fuel, when the parameters of the definition given in supplementary Note (g) to Chapter 27 are not fulfilled, cannot support the stand of the Revenue. Therefore, we are of the considered view that item cannot be held to be classified under Chapter sub-heading 27101950 of the Central Excise Tariff. Further, when the subject item is not fuel oil as per the definition given in note .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... value is Rs. 71,801/-) were confiscated under Rule 25 of Central Excise Rules, 2002 with an option to redeem the same on fine of Rs. 10,000/-. Ld. Advocate has pleaded that the quantity was actually the shortage and not the excess quantity and the adjudicating authority erroneously passed the order of confiscation with an option to pay redemption fine of Rs. 10,000/-. From the details given in the show cause notice in the Table drawn in its para No.2, it is clear that the appellant s pleading that it was actually shortage of the goods namely, Parsol, Parsol-20 and not the excess, is factually correct. In the Table of show cause notice in its para No.2, the duty for said goods has also been mentioned as Rs. 11,833/-. We find that the order- .....

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