Specific tariff classification prevails for industrial sludge when evidence shows fertiliser use and relevant fertilising elements.

Industrial Sludge was treated as a specific chemical fertiliser under Heading 31.05 because the record showed chemical processing, fertiliser use, and test reports indicating nitrogen and phosphorus, the fertilising elements relevant to that heading. The note states that the Revenue did not produce contrary laboratory evidence or effectively rebut the evidence that the goods were sold only for use as fertiliser. On that basis, the residual tariff entries in Headings 38.23 and 38.24 could not prevail over the specific heading, and the exemption under Notification No. 181/86-C.E. was considered sustainable.

---

---

Issues: Whether the product known as "Industrial Sludge" was classifiable under Heading 31.05 as a chemical fertiliser and entitled to exemption under Notification No. 181/86-C.E., or under the residual tariff entries in Heading 38.23 / 38.24 as a chemical product of the allied industries.

Analysis: The product emerged from chemical processes and the record showed that it was used as a fertiliser. Test reports from governmental and semi-governmental agencies indicated the presence of Nitrogen and Phosphorus, i.e. two fertilising elements referred to in Heading 31.05. The Revenue did not produce contrary laboratory evidence or effectively rebut the respondent's evidence that the goods were sold only for use as fertiliser during the relevant period. In these circumstances, the residual entries could not displace the specific classification claimed by the assessee.

Conclusion: The product was correctly classified under Heading 31.05 and the exemption claim was sustainable. The issue was decided in favour of the assessee.

Final Conclusion: The Revenue's challenge to the classification and exemption was rejected, and the assessee's classification was upheld.

Ratio Decidendi: Where a product satisfies the description of a specific tariff heading and the evidence shows that it contains the relevant constituent elements and is used as such, a residual entry cannot be preferred in the absence of rebuttal evidence.

---