Customs classification of fipronil insecticides rejected under Chapter 29, with the duty demand found unsustainable.

Imported fipronil insecticides were disputed on tariff classification: the department sought additional customs duty at 18% under Chapter 29, while the lower rate of 8% was claimed. The Tribunal treated the issue as already settled by the Delhi High Court's ruling striking down the relevant Board circular, and rejected the argument that the circular remained binding outside that court's territorial jurisdiction. Relying on earlier Tribunal decisions following the High Court judgment, it found the demand unsustainable and allowed the appeal.

---

---

Issues: Whether fipronil insecticides imported by the appellant were classifiable so as to attract additional customs duty at 18% under Chapter 29, or whether the lower rate of 8% applied, and whether the demand was sustainable.

Analysis: The demand was based on the view that the imported goods fell under Chapter 29 as separate chemically defined elements. The cited Delhi High Court judgment had struck down the Board circular on the issue, and the Tribunal noted that the legal position had already been settled. The view that the circular remained binding outside the territorial jurisdiction of the Delhi High Court was rejected, and the earlier Tribunal decisions following the High Court ruling were relied upon.

Conclusion: The demand was unsustainable and the appeal was allowed.

---