TMI Blog2017 (10) TMI 919X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... such an observation, we are not able to fathom how lower appellate authority finds that the impugned goods are autolysed yeast, in spite of his confusion. Once it is evident that in the process of autolysation merely results in enzymatic digestion of the cell by enzymes and their destruction, the resultant degenerated cell per se would possibly merit classification as 'Autolysed Yeast' under CTH 2106. However, when the Yeast Cell Wall on its own does not get autolysed or undergoes any change, the same would only be classifiable as yeast under CTH 2102. Appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant. - C/368/2009 - Final Order No.42357/2017 - Dated:- 9-10-2017 - Ms. Sulekha Beevi C.S. Member (Judicial) And Shri Madhu Mohan Damodhar ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... an yeast cell getting digested on its own is known as the process of autolysis and the yeast cell wall, which is nearly 1/3rd by dry weight part of the cell, is not affected. Thereafter, the yeast cell wall which does not undergo the process of autolysis is separated by centrifugation and spray drying method. As such, the yeast cell wall thus recovered can never be called as product of autolysis as the same does not undergo the process of self digestion. It is a fact that the yeast within the yeast cell wall undergoes the process of self digestion which is otherwise called as Autolysis. However, the yeast cell wall does not undergo such process of self digestion and it cannot be called as Autolysed Yeast . (ii) In terms of the HSN, t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... gned departmental appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals). 3. On the other hand, on behalf of department, Ld. A.R Shri K. Veerabhadra Reddy supports the impugned order. He submits that the product being an extract is not covered by CTH 2102; that HSN Explanatory Notes to Heading 2102 excludes 'Autolysed Yeast' which is required to be classifiable under CTH 2106. 4. Heard both sides and have gone through the facts. 5.1 From the facts on record, it emerges that the entire controversy concerns whether the product declared as Yeast Cell Wall is in the nature of Autolysed Yeast which would merit classification as Aytolysed Yeast under CTH 2106 or whether the classification under CTH 2102 declared by the appellant is more ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ter covering and occupies 26 to 32% of the cell dry weight; that Autolysation is a process, which happens by itself, i.e. self-digestion of the proteins and other constituents by the enzymes contained in the yeast cells; that only the inner constituents get self-digested which is termed as autolysation while the yeast cell wall which is nearly 1/3rd by dry weight part of the cell is not affected; that this part of the cell is separated by centrifugal and then by spray drying method; that even without the process of autolysation the yeast cell wall can be obtained after the yeast extraction method. Based on the data provided by the importer/appellant, the lower adjudicating authority concluded that the separated autolysed portion of yeast is ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ion] However lower appellate authority has not analysed whether the Yeast Cell Wall has also been produced by such process of autolysis. 5.8 The lower appellate authority has also noted that during the process of autolysis, the cells get destructed and the outer covering would also not remain integrated. Having made such an observation, we are not able to fathom how lower appellate authority finds that the impugned goods are autolysed yeast, in spite of his confusion notwithstanding the fact whether the yeast cell wall undergoes any change or not...... . Once it is evident that in the process of autolysation merely results in enzymatic digestion of the cell by enzymes and their destruction, the resultant degenerated cell per se w ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|