Export duty on iron ore fines inapplicable when Fe content below 58% calculated on Wet Metric Ton basis per Board Circular 04/2012-Cus

CESTAT Kolkata dismissed the department's appeal regarding export duty on iron ore fines. The tribunal upheld the adjudicating authority's determination that Fe content must be calculated on Wet Metric Ton basis per Board Circular No. 04/2012-Cus, not Dry Metric Ton basis as contended by the department. Applying the standard industry formula considering moisture content, the Fe content was below 58%, making export duty inapplicable. The tribunal relied on SC precedent and found no infirmity in the authority's application of the circular and formula for Fe content determination.

---

---

Issues Involved:
1. Assessment of Iron Ore Fines (IOF) under Tariff Item 2601 11 43.
2. Enhancement of the value of exported goods based on test reports.
3. Recovery of Customs duty.
4. Appropriation of deposited Customs duty.
5. Confiscation of exported IOF.
6. Imposition of penalties u/s 114A and 114AA of the Customs Act, 1962.

Summary:

The department challenged the Order-in-Original dated 23.03.2023, wherein the Commissioner of Customs (Prev), Bhubaneswar, dropped the proceedings against the Respondent initiated via show cause notice dated 25.12.2021. The Respondent had exported 34,500 MT of Iron Ore Fines (IOF) with an iron content certified at 56.87% by TCRC. The Preventive Officer's sample tested by IMMT reported 66.05% Fe content, leading to the seizure of the IOF u/s 110 of the Customs Act, 1962. Subsequent retesting by CRCL showed 58.89% Fe content on a Dry Metric Ton (DMT) basis.

The Respondent sought provisional release of the seized goods, which was granted upon payment of Customs duty under protest. The Respondent's independent tests, including those by TCRC and the Inspection Agency of China, consistently reported Fe content below 58%.

Issue 1: Assessment of IOF under Tariff Item 2601 11 43
The adjudicating authority held that Circular No. 04/2012-Cus mandates Fe content determination on Wet Metric Ton (WMT) basis, not DMT basis. Applying this standard, the Fe content was below 58%, making the goods duty-free. The department argued that the adjudicating authority ignored the CSIR-IIMT report and misapplied the formula for Fe content determination.

Issue 2: Enhancement of Value Based on Test Reports
The adjudicating authority found that Fe content on DMT basis certified by CRCL cannot be relied upon for levy of export duty, as per Circular No. 04/2012-Cus. The Respondent's independent tests corroborated Fe content below 58%.

Issue 3: Recovery of Customs Duty
The Respondent argued that IOF with Fe content below 58% is exempt from export duty under Notification No. 27/2011-Customs. The adjudicating authority agreed, finding no basis for the department's demand for Rs. 8,47,21,032/-.

Issue 4: Appropriation of Deposited Customs Duty
The adjudicating authority's decision to drop proceedings meant no appropriation of the Rs. 7,82,98,618/- deposited by the Respondent.

Issue 5: Confiscation of Exported IOF
The adjudicating authority found no grounds for confiscation as the Fe content was below 58% on WMT basis.

Issue 6: Imposition of Penalties u/s 114A and 114AA
The adjudicating authority did not impose penalties, as the proceedings were dropped based on the determination of Fe content on WMT basis.

The Tribunal upheld the adjudicating authority's order, emphasizing the application of Circular No. 04/2012-Cus and the Supreme Court's judgment in Union of India v. Gangadhar Narsingdas Aggarwal, affirming that Fe content for export duty purposes must be determined on WMT basis. The department's appeal was rejected, and the impugned order was upheld.

---