2015 (7) TMI 384 - HC - Central Excise

Calcutta High Court Upholds Tribunal's Decision on SERVO STEEROL C-6 Classification

Commissioner of Central Excise, Kolkata VI, Commissionerate Versus Indian Oil Blending Ltd. And Others

The High Court of Calcutta upheld the Tribunal's decision classifying 'SERVO STEEROL C-6' as a lubricating oil rather than a Rolling Mill Oil. The Court ... Classification - Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Hon’ble Tribunal is right in deciding that the 'SERVO STEEROL C- 6' is a lubricating oil and not a ‘Rolling Mill Oil (Specially Oil)’ without considering all the documents and literature produced before the Learned Tribunal and thus the finding of the Learned Tribunal is perverse - Held that:- Exemption is available for lubricating preparations. Mr.Bharadwaj, learned Advocate, appearing for the appellant/revenue submitted that the learned Tribunal did not consider the literature of the manufacturer itself which defines the properties of the product - The correctness of the treatise taken into account by the learned Tribunal was not assailed by Mr.Bharadwaj. If the treatise taken into account by the Tribunal is correct then it cannot be said that the view taken by the Tribunal is perverse. In that case one has to say that the view is a plausible view - Decided against Revenue. Issues:1. Classification of the product 'SERVO STEEROL C-6' as a lubricating oil or a Rolling Mill Oil.Analysis:The High Court of Calcutta addressed the challenge to a judgment and order allowing the appeal of the assessee, which was dated 6th January, 2014. The Revenue appealed the decision, questioning whether the 'SERVO STEEROL C-6' product should be classified as a lubricating oil or a Rolling Mill Oil. The Revenue contended that the Tribunal's decision was erroneous as it did not consider all the documents and literature presented. The key issue was determining whether the product qualified as a lubricating preparation for exemption purposes.In the appeal, the manufacturer's literature described 'SERVO STEEROL C-6' as a premium quality emulsifying oil recommended for cold rolling of steels, emphasizing its emulsion stability, cooling, and friction-reducing properties. The Tribunal sought to define 'lubricating preparations,' referring to authoritative treatises that outlined such preparations as substances designed to reduce friction between moving parts, typically comprising mixtures of oils, fats, or greases with additives. The Tribunal concluded that the product in question fell under the category of 'lubricating preparations' based on this definition.The Court noted that the Tribunal's reliance on the treatise to classify the product as a lubricating preparation was not disputed by the Revenue. Consequently, the Court found that if the treatise considered by the Tribunal was accurate, the Tribunal's decision could not be deemed perverse. Therefore, the Court dismissed the appeal, affirming the Tribunal's classification of 'SERVO STEEROL C-6' as a lubricating oil based on the treatise's definition of lubricating preparations.