Imported quicklime with impurities classified under CTH 2522 10 00 not CTH 2825 90 90

CESTAT Mumbai held that imported quicklime should be classified under CTH 2522 10 00 rather than CTH 2825 90 90 as claimed by Revenue. The tribunal found no basis for applying General Interpretation Rules 2 or 3 since quicklime is not a mixture requiring such classification rules. Laboratory test reports showed the imported goods contained impurities and calcium oxide content below 98%, making them unsuitable for classification under CTH 2825. The tribunal set aside the Commissioner's order confirming classification under CTH 2825 90 90 and allowed the appeal, cancelling demands and penalties imposed on appellants.

---

---

Issues Involved:
1. Classification of "quicklime" under Customs Tariff Act.
2. Applicability of exemption benefits under relevant notifications.
3. Determination of differential duty, interest, and penalties.

Summary:

1. Classification of "quicklime":
The primary issue was whether the imported "quicklime" should be classified under Customs Tariff Item 2522 10 00 or 2825 90 90. The appellants argued that the "quicklime" was used in the steel industry for removing impurities and had been consistently classified under CTH 2522 10 00 for over 20 years. They cited previous Tribunal decisions (e.g., Commissioner of Central Excise, Hyderabad-III Vs. M/s Bhadradri Minerals Pvt. Ltd.) which held that CTH 2825 covers calcium oxide of 98% purity or more, while their product had a lower purity level.

The Tribunal examined the Harmonized System of Nomenclature (HSN) explanatory notes and the General Rules for Interpretation (GIR). It concluded that "quicklime" is correctly classified under CTH 2522 10 00 as it is an impure calcium oxide obtained by calcining limestone, and does not meet the purity requirements for classification under CTH 2825.

2. Applicability of exemption benefits:
The appellants claimed exemption benefits under Notification No. 50/2017-Customs and Notification No. 01/2017-Integrated Tax. The Tribunal found that the imported goods were covered under the description "quicklime" and the relevant chapter heading 2522, thus qualifying for the exemption benefits. The Tribunal rejected the Revenue's argument that the goods should be classified under 2825, which would exclude them from the exemption.

3. Determination of differential duty, interest, and penalties:
The Revenue had issued a Show Cause Notice for recovery of differential duty, interest, and penalties based on the reclassification of the goods under CTH 2825 90 90. The Tribunal found that the reclassification by the Revenue was not legally sustainable and that the goods were correctly classified under CTH 2522 10 00. Consequently, the demands for differential duty, interest, and penalties were set aside.

Conclusion:
The Tribunal set aside the impugned orders, confirming the classification of "quicklime" under Customs Tariff Item 2522 10 00, and allowed the appeals in favor of the appellants, thereby nullifying the demands and penalties imposed by the Revenue.

---