Coking coal exemption under customs notification upheld where evidence satisfied the specification despite use in corex technology

Imported coal was found eligible for exemption as coking coal under Notification No. 21/2002-Cus because the Tribunal accepted the test report, Crucible Swelling Number and technical evidence showing it satisfied the notification's specification. The department's reliance on literature about limitations in corex technology did not prove that only blast-furnace grade coal qualified, and it did not displace the evidence supporting exemption. Where the notification does not define coking coal, eligibility depends on whether the imported coal meets the relevant specification on the evidence available; exemption could not be denied merely because the coal was used in a corex process.

---

---

Issues: Whether the imported coal was eligible for exemption as coking coal under Notification No. 21/2002-CUS dated 01.03.2002.

Analysis: The disputed goods were examined in light of the test report, the Crucible Swelling Number and the technical context of corex-based steel manufacture. The Tribunal followed its earlier view in the same assessee's case and the Bombay Bench decision on the same question, holding that the imported coal satisfied the specification contemplated by the notification. The departmental reliance on literature describing limitations in corex technology did not establish that only blast-furnace grade coal could qualify, nor did it dislodge the finding that the goods answered the exemption description.

Conclusion: The imported coal was held eligible for exemption under the notification, and the denial of exemption was unsustainable.

Ratio Decidendi: Where the notification does not define coking coal and the imported coal satisfies the relevant specification on the evidence available, exemption cannot be denied merely because it is used in a corex process rather than in conventional blast-furnace technology.

---