Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether imported quicklime with calcium oxide content below 98% was classifiable under Customs Tariff Item No. 2522 1000 as claimed by the assessee or under Customs Tariff Item No. 2825 9090 as contended by Revenue.
Analysis: The goods were found, on the chemical test reports relied upon, to contain calcium oxide in the range of about 87.20% to 90.50%, and therefore below 98%. The relevant tariff scheme and HSN Explanatory Notes indicate that quicklime falls under Chapter 25, while Chapter 28 covers calcium oxide only in the pure state, that is, at a high degree of purity of about 98% or more. The residuary heading under Chapter 28 could not be preferred when the product specifically answered the description of quicklime under Chapter 25 and the requisite purity for Chapter 28 was not met. The Tribunal also followed its earlier coordinate bench view on the same classification issue.
Conclusion: The goods were rightly classifiable under Customs Tariff Item No. 2522 1000 and not under Customs Tariff Item No. 2825 9090; Revenue's reclassification was rejected.