Iron ore export duty valuation based on Fe content requires proper sampling under Section 144 with exporter knowledge

CESTAT Kolkata allowed the appeal regarding valuation of iron ore fines based on Fe content for export duty purposes. The tribunal held that the CRCL test report was unreliable as the sample was drawn without the exporter's knowledge, violating Section 144 of the Customs Act, 1962. The sampling did not adhere to BIS standards as required by Board Circular 12/2014-Cus, and the two-month delay between sample collection and testing rendered results doubtful. The tribunal found the CRCL report cryptic and incomplete, lacking proper testing protocols and storage conditions.

---

---

Issues Involved:
1. Determination of Iron Content for Export Duty
2. Admissibility of CRCL Test Report
3. Adherence to BIS Standards for Sample Testing
4. Valuation of Iron Ore Fines on Wet Metric Ton (WMT) Basis

Summary:

1. Determination of Iron Content for Export Duty
The dispute revolves around the 'Fe' content in iron ore fines exported by the appellant and the consequent determination of value for export duty. The appellant contended that the iron content was below 58%, classifying the product under heading 26011142, attracting NIL rate of duty as per Notification No. 15/2016-Cus. The proper officer, however, based the assessment on the CRCL report, which indicated an iron content of 62.4%, thereby attracting a 30% export duty.

2. Admissibility of CRCL Test Report
The appellant challenged the CRCL report on two grounds:
a) The report was not supplied to them during the first round of litigation, depriving them of a fair opportunity to contest it.
b) The samples were not drawn and tested according to the procedure set out in BS1405-2010. The tribunal noted that the CRCL report was not disclosed until the second round of litigation, making it unreliable.

3. Adherence to BIS Standards for Sample Testing
The appellant argued that the CRCL samples were not drawn in accordance with BIS standards, which require specific procedures for sample preparation and moisture determination. The tribunal noted discrepancies in the CRCL's adherence to these standards, including improper storage of samples and delayed testing, which compromised the reliability of the results.

4. Valuation of Iron Ore Fines on Wet Metric Ton (WMT) Basis
The tribunal referred to the apex court's decision in Union of India Vs. Gangadhar Narsinghdas Agarwal, which held that the assessment of iron ore fines should be on a WMT basis. The tribunal found that the load port and discharge port test reports, which adhered to BIS standards, indicated iron content below 58%. Therefore, the CRCL report, which assessed iron content on a dry basis, was deemed invalid for determining export duty.

Conclusion:
The tribunal set aside the order of the learned Commissioner (Appeals) and allowed the appeal, emphasizing the need for adherence to BIS standards and the WMT basis for determining iron content in iron ore fines for export duty purposes.

---