9911796707
TMI Blog1988 (4) TMI 50X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... m imposed on the respondent. The department had levied duty on the product known as 'Santicizer 429' imported by the respondent. The respondent had contested this duty and filed a claim for the refund. The Assistant Collector of Customs rejected this claim. The Assistant Collector on test found it to be organic compound (easier - type) inform of colourless viscore liquid and as per 7.0.046, should be considered as polymeric plasti ciner. The Appellate Collector found that Chapter 38 of the Customs Tariff Act, 1975 was residuary in nature. According to him, if the item was not covered by any other chapter of the Customs Tariff Act, 1975 then it would fall under Chapter 38. The Appellate Collector further found that linear polysters were cove ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... before the Tribunal to show that Santicizer was a resin or plastic material as defined in Explanatory Notes to C.C.C.N. It was neither similar to resols or polysiobutylene to attract the mischief of Note 2(c) to Chapter 39 nor a separately defined Chemical Compound so as to fall within Chapters 28 or 29 of Customs Tariff Act, 1975. Hence, it was classifiable not under Heading 39.01/06 as it stood before its amendment in 1978 but under 38.01/19(6) of Customs Tariff Act, 1975 as "plasticizer, not elsewhere specified". 3. The Tribunal in its decision considered the technical leaflet on the product. "Santicizer 429 was described as a medium-high molecular polyester plasticizer made from a glycol reacted with a dibasic acid. Among the propertie ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... - polymer contacts and generating additional free volume; also as some interaction between polymers and plasticizers off-setting the spacing effect; or both." The Tribunal came to the conclusion that plasticizers were not resins; these are added to resins to impart better flexibility or plastic properties to the latter. Nor did they seem to be plastic materials by themselves. The Tribunal found that Santicizer 429 which is admittedly a plasticizer would, therefore, not have fallen for classification under Heading No. 39.01/06 of the Customs Tariff Schedule as it stood prior to its amendment in 1978. 4. The said reasoning was reiterated by the Tribunal in the decision of Collector of Customs, Bombay v. Bhor Industries Ltd. and Another. Th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
