2000 (4) TMI 69 - AT - Central Excise

Tribunal Ruling: Inks Classified Differently - Nil Rate vs. 18% - Writing vs. Marker Inks

The appeal was partly allowed by the Tribunal, setting aside the original order and remanding the matter back to the Assistant Commissioner for ... Ink Issues:1. Classification of writing inks and drawing inks under sub-headings 3215.10 and 3215.90 of CETA, 1985.Analysis:The appeal was filed by the revenue against the finding of the Commissioner regarding the classification of writing inks and drawing inks. The Commissioner accepted the contention that writing and drawing inks are used interchangeably, as indicated by the description in Chapter Heading 32.15. However, it was observed that the adjudicating authority did not clearly establish that the inks in question are not covered by the category of 'other inks.' The Commissioner set aside the original order and allowed the appeal, subject to the satisfaction of the jurisdictional Assistant Commissioner that the inks used in sketch pens, permanent markers, and hi-liter pens do not fall under the category of 'other inks.'The grounds taken in the appeal emphasized that Chapter Heading 32.15 includes printing ink, writing or drawing ink, and other inks, with sub-headings 3215 and 3215.90 covering writing inks and other inks, respectively. It was argued that drawing inks cannot be classified under sub-heading 3215.10, as only writing inks are specifically mentioned under this sub-heading. The distinction between writing ink and drawing ink was highlighted, stating that while writing ink can be used for drawing, the reverse is not always true. Drawing ink was argued to be distinct and should fall under sub-heading 3215.90 as 'other inks.'Advocate submission noted that there is no difference between drawing and writing inks and marker inks manufactured by them. It was highlighted that the raw materials used in hi-liter pen ink, marking pen ink, and sketch pen ink are the same, and necessary declarations were filed before the excise authorities.The Tribunal found that Heading 3515 of CETA and HSN align with the sub-headings under CETA from 1-3-1997. Writing inks were classified under sub-heading 3215.10 at nil rate, while other inks were classified under 3215.90 at 18%. The scope of writing ink was found to cover drawing inks, along with various other specified inks like marking inks. The Tribunal concluded that sketch pen and drawing inks would fall under Heading 3215.10 for writing inks, while marker inks and hi-liter inks would be classified under Heading 3215.90.In conclusion, the classifications were decided accordingly, and the matter was remanded back to the Assistant Commissioner to calculate the demands. The appeal was partly allowed based on the above analysis.