9911796707
Advanced Search 
TMI Blog2017 (2) TMI 764X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed that final product was prepared by mixturing together extract of Acacia Catechu, Cashew Husk and Catechin derived from imported Gambier extract and was cleared as 'Indian Katha' classifying the same under Tariff Item No. 1404950 on payment of Central Excise duty @ 5% adv. with effect from 01.03.2011, since the appellants were availing facility of Cenvat Credit including Cenvat Credit of CVD paid on imported Gambier extract. On the basis of statement recorded under Section 14 of the Central Excise Act, 1944 of Shri R.K. Agrawal, AGM of the Appellant and on the basis of examination of Chapter 32 schedule to Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985 it appeared to Revenue that the goods manufactured by the appellant were not eligible to be classifiable under Tariff item No. 14049050 as 'Indian Katha' but were classifiable under Tariff item No. 32019090 attracting Central Excise duty @ 10 adv. It was contended in the show-cause-notice that the goods manufactured by the appellants were "Katha substitute" or I Katha' like substances consisting of Catechin rich in Tannin substances and therefore, it was appropriately classifiable under Tariff item No. 32019090. On the basis of clearances ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hey further submitted that going by the general rule of interpretation of Schedule to Tariff Act, 1985, the essential character to the goods manufactured by them is given by Catechin and not given by Tannin. They further placed their reliance on general explanatory note No. 3 and contended that the essential character of their product is provided by Catechin and therefore, it is rightly classifiable under Tariff Item No. 14049050. The said show-cause notice was adjudicated by Original Authority through above stated Order-in-Original dated 31.03.2013. 3.1 The Original Authority has gone through the process of manufacture where the extract of Acacia Catechu and extracts from 'Cashew husk' and Gambier extract were taken together for manufacture of 'Indian Katha' by the appellants. The Original Authority has held at para 31 of his impugned order that the goods manufactured by the appellants are known in the market by the name 'Katha'. He has in subsequent para referred the explanation in Wikipedia for "Catechu" that 'Katha' and 'Cutch' both have property of tanning and therefore, he held that they should be classified under Chapter 32. He has further taken into ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 69% on dry basis. They further contended that HSN has provided the description of the goods covered under Chapter 32 as tannin extracts of vegetable origin and contended that the final product manufactured by them does not pre-dominantly contained tannin but pre-dominantly contains Catechin and therefore it cannot be classified under Chapter 32 but it should be appropriately classified under Tariff Item No. 14049050. 5. Shir Kapil Vaish, learned CA on behalf of the Appellant submitted that 'Indian Katha' manufactured by the appellant is mixture of extracts derived from Acacia Catechu, Cashew Husk and Catechin derived from imported Gambier extract. He contended that in terms of Rule 3(b) of General Rules for the Interpretation of Schedule to Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985, the mixtures are to be classified as if it consists of the material or component which gives the mixture it essential character. He further contended that Catechin gives the essential character to the goods manufactured by them and therefore, it should be rightly classified under Chapter 14049050 as 'Indian Katha'. He has submitted few copies of sample sale invoices during the relevant period and the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... must give the words, used by the legislature, their popular sense meaning "that sense which common. people conversant with the subject-matter with which the statue is dealing, would attribute to it." He has further relied on the ruling by Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CCE, Nagpur Vs. Shree Baidyanath Ayurved Bhawan Ltd., reported at 2009 (237) ELT 225 (SC) and submitted that at para 41, the Hon'ble Supreme Court has ruled that the definition of one statute having different object, purpose and scheme cannot be applied mechanically to another statue and that the object of Excise Act is to revenue for which various products are differently classified in New Tariff Act. Shri Kapil Vaish, further argued that the examination of matter in the light of provisions of Prevention of Food Adulteration Rules to decide issue of classification by Original Authority was contrary to the law established by Hon'ble Supreme Court as indicated in the rulings relied upon by him. He further contended that enquiries with people ascertained with their trade as submitted as additional submission before the Original Authority and the description of the product in the invoices issued ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
