TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Tribunal reclassifies acid oil under Central Excise Tariff, emphasizing characteristics & industry practices.</h1> <h3>KUSUM PRODUCTS LTD., CALCUTTA Versus COLLECTOR OF CENTRAL EXCISE, CALCUTTA</h3> The Tribunal set aside the Collector's classification of acid oil under Item 68 of the Central Excise Tariff (CET) and held that it should be classified ... - Issues:Classification of acid oil under Central Excise Tariff (CET) - Item 12 vs. Item 68.Detailed Analysis:Issue 1: Classification of acid oil under CET - Item 12 vs. Item 68The appeal was filed against the order of the Collector of Central Excise and Customs, West Bengal, which classified acid oil as a new product under Item 68 of the CET. The Collector argued that acid oil, due to its high acid content, should be assessed under Item 68 and not as a Vegetable Non-essential (VNE) oil under Item 12. The appellant, M/s. Kusum Products, contended that acid oil was a VNE oil and should be assessed under Item 12, as the treatment with sulphuric acid did not create a new product but merely altered the original oil. The Tribunal examined the characteristics of VNE oils, emphasizing that a high free fatty acid content alone does not disqualify an oil from being classified as a VNE oil. The Tribunal highlighted that VNE oils are distinguishable from essential oils based on their properties and uses in industries like soap manufacturing.Issue 2: Interpretation of Commercial NomenclatureThe Tribunal analyzed the commercial nomenclature surrounding acid oil, noting that it was sold as acid oil and not specifically as VNE oil. The discussion highlighted that VNE oil is not a common commercial term, with oils typically being marketed based on their specific sources like groundnut oil or coconut oil. This distinction was crucial in determining the appropriate classification under the CET.Issue 3: Comparison of CCCN and CET ClassificationsThe Tribunal compared the classification of acid oils under the Customs Co-operation Council Nomenclature (CCCN) and the Central Excise Tariff (CET). While the CCCN placed acid oils under a separate heading from VNE oils, the Tribunal emphasized that the CET's Item 12 encompassed all types of vegetable non-essential oils. The discussion focused on the recognition of acid oils as oils in literature and authoritative sources, supporting their classification under Item 12 of the CET.Conclusion:The Tribunal set aside the Board's order and held that acid oil should be classified under Item 12 of the CET as a VNE oil, rejecting the argument that it fell under Item 68. The judgment emphasized the characteristics and properties of VNE oils, the commercial practices surrounding acid oil, and the broader scope of Item 12 in covering various vegetable oils, including those derived from refining processes. The detailed analysis provided clarity on the classification of acid oil and highlighted the importance of considering industry practices and authoritative sources in interpreting tariff classifications.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
