TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Revenue appeal dismissed; exported iron ore fines reclassified under CTI 2601 1142, duty redetermined per CBEC Circular 04/2012</h1> CESTAT MUMBAI - AT dismissed the Revenue's appeal and upheld the Commissioner (Appeals) order reclassifying the exported iron ore fines under CTI 2601 ... Change in classification of exported iron ore fines under CTI 2601 1143, on the basis of the test report submitted by the DyCC, Goa - HELD THAT:- The learned Commissioner (Appeals) in the impugned order, after taking into consideration the Board’s Circular No.04/2012-Customs dated 17.02.2012 has determined the (percentage of) Fe content as per DyCC report on wet basis as below 59%. In arriving at such conclusion, he had given due consideration for deduction of moisture content of 9% from the reported 59% Fe content on dry basis. Therefore, he concluded that the re-classification of the iron ore fines under CTI 2601 1143, which is applicable for iron ore fines having Fe content of 58% or more but less than 60%, is incorrect. In view of the observations made in the impugned order, it is opined that the learned Commissioner (Appeals) has correctly analysed the circular dated 17.02.2012, which is in conformity with the ratio of the judgement laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Gangadhar Narsingdas Agarwal [1995 (8) TMI 73 - SUPREME COURT]. Further, it is also found that considering the prescribed yardstick for ascertainment of quality of iron ore (Fe content), the Hon’ble High Court of Bombay at Goa in the case of V. M. Salgaocar and Brother Pvt. Ltd., & Ors. [2022 (9) TMI 1306 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT], has held that the assessments shall be governed by the principles of law in regard to the classification as laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Gangadhar Narsingdas Aggarwal, as clarified by the CBEC in their circular dated 17.02.2012. Since, the impugned order is in conformity with both the circular dated 17.02.2012 and as per the principle laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the above case, it is opined that there is no infirmity in the said order passed by the learned Commissioner (Appeals). There are no infirmity in the impugned order, insofar as it has upheld classification of the impugned goods under CTI 2601 1142 and directing the proper officer to re-determine the duty liability under such tariff classification - Therefore, appeal filed by Revenue is dismissed. ISSUES PRESENTED AND CONSIDERED 1. Whether the exported iron ore fines are correctly classifiable under the lower tariff item applicable to ores with Fe content below 58% (CTI 2601 1142) or under the higher tariff item for ores with Fe content of 58% or more but less than 60% (CTI 2601 1143), having regard to competing laboratory reports showing Fe content on dry basis and wet basis. 2. Whether the proper basis for determination of net Fe content for tariff classification is Dry Metric Tonne (DMT) as reported by an independent sampler or Wet Metric Tonne/weight-with-moisture (WMT) after deduction of moisture and impurities, in light of the Board's Circular dated 17.02.2012 and the ratio of the apex court in Gangadhar Narsingdas Agarwal. 3. Whether a non-statutory General Alert Circular issued by the Directorate of Revenue Intelligence can be relied upon by the proper officer to re-classify goods or to complete assessment proceedings in preference to statutory procedure and authoritative circulars/judicial precedents. ISSUE-WISE DETAILED ANALYSIS Issue 1 - Correct tariff classification based on Fe content Legal framework: Tariff classification depends on iron (Fe) content thresholds; the classification dispute turns on whether Fe % meets the threshold for CTI 2601 1143 (58%-
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
