Classification under Heading 2106 failed where mineral-type products were not proved to be food preparations; undervaluation was upheld.

Concentrated Mineral Drops, Elete Electrolyte and Nanosil were held not classifiable under Heading 2106 because the department did not establish, by evidence or test material, that they were food preparations covered by the chapter notes; they were treated as natural mineral-type products rather than residuary food preparations. The declared import values were nevertheless rejected, as documents and correspondence indicated conditional discounts, under-invoicing, and suppression of freight and ex-works charges, and the assessee did not dislodge that material. Redetermination of assessable value was therefore upheld in principle, with only limited recalculation required on the corrected tariff basis.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether Concentrated Mineral Drops, Elete Electrolyte and Nanosil were classifiable under Heading 3004 or Heading 2106 of the Customs Tariff Act, 1975. (ii) Whether the declared import values were liable to rejection and re-determination.

Issue (i): Whether Concentrated Mineral Drops, Elete Electrolyte and Nanosil were classifiable under Heading 3004 or Heading 2106 of the Customs Tariff Act, 1975.

Analysis: The products were claimed to be natural mineral concentrates or a suspended silver solution, while the department treated them as food preparations under the residuary Heading 2106. The tariff notes for Heading 2106 contemplate prepared food products of the kind described in the chapter notes, and the record did not contain expert evidence or test material to establish that the goods were food preparations. The products were found to be comparable to natural mineral water type goods rather than preparations answering to Heading 2106. Following the reasoning applied in the earlier decision on identical mineral drops, the goods were held not to fall within Heading 2106. The same reasoning was applied to Elete and Nanosil.

Conclusion: The classification under Heading 2106 was rejected and the goods were held to merit classification outside that heading, in favour of the assessee.

Issue (ii): Whether the declared import values were liable to rejection and re-determination.

Analysis: The investigation recovered documents and correspondence indicating conditional discounts, under-invoicing, suppression of freight and ex-works charges, and disclosure of lower invoice values for customs purposes. The appellant did not successfully dislodge the documentary material relied upon by the department. The declared transaction values were therefore not accepted, and redetermination of the assessable value was sustained in principle. However, since the goods were held classifiable under Heading 2501 rather than Heading 2106, the exact duty consequence required limited recalculation.

Conclusion: Rejection of the declared values and their redetermination was upheld, in favour of the Revenue.

Final Conclusion: The appeal succeeded on classification, failed on valuation, and the matter was sent back only for limited computation of the differential duty on the corrected tariff basis.

Ratio Decidendi: A product cannot be classified under Heading 2106 unless the department establishes, by evidence, that it is a food preparation covered by the chapter notes; where such proof is absent and the goods are in substance natural mineral-type products, Heading 2106 does not apply.

---