CESTAT rules Di-Calcium Phosphate exempt from duty under Notification No. 04/2016-CX

The Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Hyderabad ruled in favor of the Appellant in a case concerning the classification and duty payable on Di-Calcium Phosphate (animal feed grade). The Tribunal found that the product, manufactured from rock phosphate, qualified for exemption under Notification No. 04/2016-CX (N.T), which exempted duty on Di-Calcium Phosphate specifically made from rock phosphate origin. As the product met the criteria outlined in the Notification, the demands for duty were deemed unsustainable. The Tribunal set aside the impugned order, allowing the appeals with consequential reliefs, emphasizing the importance of correctly applying relevant notifications for determining classification and duty payable on goods.

---

---

Issues:
Central Excise duty payable on Di-Calcium Phosphate (animal feed grade) under Chapter CETH 2309 9010 versus 2835 2500 classification.

Analysis:
The judgment by the Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Hyderabad addressed the issue of the correct classification and duty payable on Di-Calcium Phosphate (animal feed grade). The Appellant had cleared the product claiming a nil rate of duty and classifying it under Chapter CETH 2309 9010. The Revenue argued that the correct classification should be under 2835 2500, as the appellant used Rock Phosphate as raw material, not animal bones. The Appellant relied on Notification No. 04/2016-CX (N.T) dated 12.02.2016, which exempted duty on Di-Calcium Phosphate specifically manufactured from rock phosphate origin. The Tribunal found that the appellant's product was indeed manufactured from rock phosphate, making it eligible for the exemption under the said Notification.

Upon perusal of the records and the Notification, the Tribunal concluded that the appellant's product fell under the purview of the 11C Notification dated February 12, 2016. This Notification exempted the duty of excise payable on Di-Calcium Phosphate of rock phosphate origin under heading 2835 during a specific period. As the appellant's product met the criteria outlined in the Notification, the demands confirmed by the Adjudicating Authority were deemed unsustainable. The Tribunal highlighted the specific language and provisions of the Notification to support its decision.

In light of the Notification and the clear eligibility of the appellant's product for the exemption, the Tribunal set aside the impugned order and allowed the appeals with any consequential reliefs. The judgment underscored the importance of correctly applying relevant notifications and provisions to determine the appropriate classification and duty payable on goods, providing clarity and relief to the appellant in this case.

---