Customs classification turned on proof of kerosene specifications; incomplete testing meant the declared solvent description prevailed.

Classification of imported goods depended on whether the Revenue could prove that they met all parameters for Superior Kerosene Oil under the applicable Indian Standard. The laboratory evidence was incomplete, and the additional test ordered by the High Court could not be carried out because the referred laboratory lacked adequate testing facilities. In the absence of conclusive proof that every required specification for kerosene was satisfied, the Revenue's reclassification failed. The importer's material showing use of the goods as raw material for solvent manufacture also supported the declared description, and the goods were treated as Petroleum Hydrocarbon Solvent.

---

---

Issues: Whether the imported goods were correctly classified by the Revenue as Superior Kerosene Oil or were classifiable as Petroleum Hydrocarbon Solvent as declared by the importer.

Analysis: The classification dispute turned on whether the Revenue had discharged the burden of proving that the goods satisfied all the parameters required for classification as kerosene under the applicable Indian Standard. The available laboratory report tested only some parameters, and the further test directed by the High Court could not be completed because the referred laboratory reported lack of adequate testing facilities. In the absence of conclusive evidence establishing that all required specifications for kerosene were met, the Revenue's reclassification could not be sustained. The importer also produced material indicating use of the goods as raw material in the manufacture of solvents, which supported the declared description.

Conclusion: The Revenue failed to establish classification of the imported goods as Superior Kerosene Oil, and the goods were held to be correctly declared as Petroleum Hydrocarbon Solvent.

---