Tariff classification of maize starch depends on proven physical and chemical properties, not departmental opinion alone.

Tariff classification of maize starch turned on whether the goods were proven to be modified starch under Chapter Heading 35.05 or native starch under Chapter Heading 11.03. The analysis stressed that classification must be determined from the goods' actual physical and chemical properties, including viscosity, gelatinization temperature and solubility, and that a departmental chemical opinion alone is insufficient without independent testing and proper evaluation of contrary technical evidence. On the material discussed, the products were not proved to be modified starch, making classification under Chapter Heading 35.05 unsustainable and rendering the related duty demands and penalties untenable.

---

---

Issues: Whether the impugned maize starch products were classifiable as modified starch under Chapter Heading 35.05 or as starch under Chapter Heading 11.03 of the Central Excise Tariff.

Analysis: The competing tariff entries turned on the physical and chemical characteristics of the goods. The record showed that modified starch and native starch are distinguished by properties such as viscosity, gelatinization temperature, solubility and related test parameters. The adjudicating authority relied mainly on the opinion of the departmental Chemical Examiner, but the samples were not independently tested for the relevant parameters and the actual manufacturing process was not adequately examined. The assessee also produced technical literature and expert opinions indicating that the products retained the characteristics of native starch. In a classification dispute of this nature, a conclusive finding cannot rest only on a departmental opinion without empirical testing of the relevant properties and proper consideration of the competing technical material.

Conclusion: The impugned goods were not proved to be modified starch and the classification under Chapter Heading 35.05 was unsustainable.

Final Conclusion: The duty demands and penalties founded on the disputed classification were set aside and the appeals succeeded.

Ratio Decidendi: In tariff classification disputes, the decisive test is the proven character of the goods on the basis of relevant physical and chemical parameters, and a classification adverse to the assessee cannot be sustained solely on a departmental expert opinion without proper testing and evaluation of contrary technical evidence.

---