Supreme Court of India
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE H.L. DATTU & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL R. DAVE
Commnr.Of Central Excise, Bhopal
Versus
Minwool Rock Fibres Ltd.
CIVIL APPEAL NO.4988 OF 2003 WITH CIVIL APPEAL NOS.2504-2505 OF 2004
Decided on: 02-02-2012
Civil Appeal Nos.60-61 of 2003 – Relied upon
Facts of the case:
The Customs, Excise and Gold (Control) Appellate Tribunal, New Delhi accepted the assessee’s stand that the goods namely, Slagwool and Rockwool are to be classified under Chapter sub-heading No.6807.10 by rejecting the stand of the revenue that it requires to be classified under sub-heading No.6803.00.
Finding of the Court:
There is no infirmity in the impugned judgment.
Result: Appeals disposed of.
Judgment :-
C.A.No.4988/2003:
1. This appeal is directed against the judgment and order passed by the Customs, Excise and Gold (Control) Appellate Tribunal, New Delhi (for short 'the Tribunal') in Final Order No.204/2002-D in Appeal No.E/964/2002-D dated 22.08.2002. By the impugned judgment and order, the Tribunal has accepted the assessee's stand that the goods namely, Slagwool and Rockwool are to be classified under Chapter sub-heading No.6807.10 by rejecting the stand of the revenue that it requires to be classified under sub-heading No.6803.00.
2. The assessee had filed the classification declaration before the adjudicating authority, under Rule 173 B of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 (for short `the Rule), inter alia, claiming that the goods, namely, Slagwool and Rockwool requires to be classified under Chapter sub-heading No.6807.10 of Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985 (for short `the Act') with effect from 09.06.1998.
3. A show cause notice was issued to the assessee directing them to show cause as to why the goods in issue should not be classified under Chapter sub-heading No.6803.00 and duty of 18% should not be charged and recovered from them under Rule 9(2) read with Section 11-A of the Act and as to why penalty should not be imposed under Rule 173Q of the Rules. After receipt of the show cause notice, the assessee filed its reply dated 16.11.1998, inter-alia, contending that they are manufacturing `Min wool' using more than 25% of blast furnace slag by weight, right from 1993 onwards and they have been filing classification declarations mentioning this fact and such declarations so filed prior to 1997-98 are accepted by the department and, therefore, the goods in question requires to be classified under Chapter sub-heading No.6807.10 of the Act.
4. The adjudicating authority, after accepting the stand of the assessee, passed an order dated 31.01.2000, inter-alia, holding that the appropriate classification of the goods in issue should be under Chapter sub-heading No.6807.10 of the Act. The revenue, being aggrieved by the classification so accepted by the adjudicating authority, had carried the matter by way of an appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals), Customs and Central Excise, who by its order dated 23.01.2002, allowed the revenue's appeal and, thereby, declared that the goods in question are to be classified under Chapter sub-heading No.6803.00 and not under sub-heading No.6807.10, as claimed by the assessee.
5. The assessee had carried the matter in appeal before the Tribunal. The Tribunal has allowed the assessee's appeal by its order dated 22.08.2002 and, thereby, restored the order passed by the adjudicating authority. It is the correctness or otherwise of the aforesaid order passed by the Tribunal is the subject matter of present appeal.
6. We need to notice the relevant entries under Chapter 68 of the Act and the sub heading No.6803.00 and sub-heading No.6807.10 etc. The same reads as under :
"Table"
7. The rate of duty for the aforesaid goods if it is classified under sub-heading No.6803.00 is at 18% and if it is classified under sub-heading No.6807.10, is at 8%.
8. Sub-heading No.6803.00 speaks of Slagwool, Rockwool and similar wools, whereas sub-heading No.6807.10 speaks of goods in which more than 25% by weight, red mud, press mud or blast furnace slag or one or more of these materials is used.
9. Sub-heading No.6807.10 was introduced after the Budget of 1997.
10. The period in question of this appeal is after 9th June, 1998.
11. Shri R.P.Bhatt, learned senior counsel appearing for the revenue would submit that when there is a specific heading/sub-heading wherein the goods, such as Slagwool, Rockwool and similar wools are enumerated, that entry requires to be applied and not the general entry or a residuary entry. Learned counsel also brings to our notice about the Circular issued by the Central Board of Excise and Customs (for short `the Board') dated 17.09.2001 to substantiate that the Board, a
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.