2015 (3) TMI 296 - AT - Central Excise

Tribunal upholds duty calculation on product as 'Other Mastics' under Central Excise Act.

Commissioner of Central Excise, Pune-II Versus Yashwant Industries Works Pvt. Ltd.

The appellate tribunal affirmed the classification of the product as 'Other Mastics,' excluded from Section 4A, and upheld duty calculation based on the ... Levy of duty as per Section 4 or Section 4A - Classification of goods - Held that:- Examiner's report is not in dispute which clearly classified the product as 'Other Mastics'. Although the product in question is covered under Ch.3214, is 'Other Mastics' but 'Other Mastics' have been excluded for levy of duty as per Section 4A of Central Excise Act, 1944. Therefore, both the lower authorities have rightly held that the duty on the product is to be leviable as per Section 4 of the Act i.e. on transaction value. - No infirmity in the impugned order and the same is upheld - Decided against Revenue. Issues involved: Classification of goods under Central Excise Act, 1944; Applicability of Section 4A; Duty calculation based on transaction value.Analysis:1. Classification of Goods: The case involved a dispute regarding the classification of Superseal Mastic Epoxy Putty under the brand name 'Feviseal Easimix' for duty payment. The Revenue contended that the goods should be classified under Chapter Heading 3214.00 and fall under Section 4A of the Central Excise Act, 1944. However, the examiner's report classified the product as 'Other Mastics,' which are excluded from the levy of duty under Section 4A. Both lower authorities upheld that the product falls under 'Other Mastics' and should be assessed for duty under Section 4 based on transaction value.2. Applicability of Section 4A: The adjudicating authority issued a show-cause notice to the respondent, requiring duty payment as per Section 4A of the Central Excise Act, 1944. However, based on the examiner's report, it was established that the product in question, although under Chapter Heading 3214, was classified as 'Other Mastics,' which are specifically excluded from the purview of Section 4A. Consequently, the duty liability was determined to be under Section 4, i.e., based on the transaction value, as confirmed by both the Commissioner (Appeals) and the appellate tribunal.3. Duty Calculation Based on Transaction Value: The appellate tribunal, after considering the submissions and records, found no discrepancy in the impugned order. It was concluded that the duty on the product should be levied as per Section 4 of the Act, which mandates calculation based on the transaction value. Consequently, the appeals filed by the Revenue were dismissed, and the Cross Objections were disposed of accordingly, upholding the decision to assess duty on the product under Section 4.In summary, the appellate tribunal affirmed the classification of the product as 'Other Mastics,' excluded from Section 4A, and upheld the duty calculation based on the transaction value under Section 4 of the Central Excise Act, 1944.