TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
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>Tribunal Classifies Chinese Menthol Crystal for Customs Duty, Grants Partial Refund</h1> <h3>PACIFIC EXPORTS Versus COLLECTOR OF CUSTOMS</h3> PACIFIC EXPORTS Versus COLLECTOR OF CUSTOMS - 1991 (52) E.L.T. 622 (Tribunal) Issues:Classification of 'Chinese Menthol Crystal - Polar Bear Brand USP/BP' for levy of basic customs duty under the Customs Tariff Act and countervailing duty under the Central Excise Tariff.Analysis:1. The appellants imported Chinese Menthol Crystal USP/BP/I Grade and claimed assessment under Heading 29.01/45(13) of the Customs Tariff Act and under T.I. 68 of the erstwhile Central Excise Tariff, disputing the initial classification under 29.01/45(11) and T.I. 58 CET. They filed a refund application for the difference in duty rates.2. The Refund Department requested technical literature and end-use certificates for the imported Menthol Crystals. The appellants amended their refund claim to only basic duty refund, reducing the claim amount. The Assistant Collector rejected the refund claim, citing the predominant use of Menthol as an Aromatic Chemical and the absence of end-use certificates.3. The dispute arose regarding the classification under both the Customs Tariff and Central Excise Tariff. The appellants initially claimed a refund of customs duty and countervailing duty but later restricted it to basic duty only. The Assistant Collector's decision included countervailing duty, which the appellants contested in their appeal to the Collector of Customs (Appeals).4. The Tribunal addressed the countervailing duty aspect first, emphasizing the principle that a specific entry in the Central Excise Tariff prevails over a general entry. It cited precedents to support the classification of goods under a specific entry, in this case, T.I. 58 CET for Menthol Crystals, not under the general entry T.I. 68.5. Regarding the classification for basic customs duty, the Tribunal compared the definitions of Heading 29.01/45(13) for Pharmaceutical Chemicals and 29.01/45(11) for Aromatic Chemicals. It considered expert references indicating the medical-grade use of Menthol and Customs Tariff Advice supporting classification under Heading 29.01/45(13).6. The Tribunal concluded that the imported goods should be assessed under Heading 29.01/45(13) for basic customs duty and T.I. 58 CET for countervailing duty, thereby not qualifying for the exemption under Notification 234/82-C.E. The appeal was partly allowed based on this classification analysis.
TaxTMI 