G. Sankaran, Member (T)

1. The captioned appeal was initially filed as a Revision Application before the Central Government which, in terms of Section 131-B of the Customs Act, 1962, has come as transferred proceedings to this Tribunal for disposal as if it were an appeal presented before it.

2. The issue arising for determination in the present case is whether the consignment of Thymol B.P. Grade imported by the appellants was eligible for exemption from levy of additional (countervailing) customs duty in terms of Central Excise Notification No. 55/75. The lower authorities denied the benefit of the said notification on the ground that Thymol by itself was not a drug or a drug intermediate.

3. In the hearing before us on 14th June 1984, Shri Sogani, Consultant, for the appellants, submitted that the Customs authorities had classified the goods under Heading No. 29.01/45(13) of the First Schedule to the Customs Tariff Act, 1975 for the purpose of levy of basic customs duty. In the circumstance, it was not correct to deny the benefit of Notification No. 55/75. Shri Chandramouli, SDR, could not say what was the basis for the customs authorities to adopt the apparently contradictory stands in the matter of levy of basic and additional duties.

4. We have considered the matter carefully. Heading No. 29.01/45(13) reads as follows :

"Pharmaceutical chemicals, that is, chemicals having prophylactic or therapeutic value and used solely or predominantly as drugs, not elsewhere specified."

Having classified the goods under the above heading, it is difficult to see why the customs authorities did not consider the goods as eligible for the benefit of notification No. 55/75 as covered by the description "all drugs, medicines, pharmaceuticals and drug intermediates, not elsewhere specified.'

"Pharmaceutical" means a chemical used in medicine. The very fact that the Custom House has classified (correctly, in our opinion) the goods as pharmaceutical chemical under heading No. 29.01/45(13) would show that the goods were pharmaceuticals within the meaning of Notification No. 55/75. The question of main or predominant use would not, in the circumstances, be a relevant consideration.

5. In the result, we allow the appeal with consequential relief to the appellants which should be granted by the concerned Asstt. Collector within 3 months from the date communication of this order.