TaxTMI Login
AI OCR ✕Convert scanned orders, printed notices, PDFs and images into clean, searchable, editable text within seconds. Starting at 2 Credits/page
Try Now →Just a moment...
AI OCR ✕Convert scanned orders, printed notices, PDFs and images into clean, searchable, editable text within seconds. Starting at 2 Credits/page
Try Now →
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
of 
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: (i) Whether impure carbon dioxide removed by the assessee was classifiable under Tariff Item 14H of the erstwhile Central Excise Tariff; (ii) whether the assessee was entitled to exemption under Notification No. 40/85 or Notification No. 235/85.
Issue (i): Whether impure carbon dioxide removed by the assessee was classifiable under Tariff Item 14H of the erstwhile Central Excise Tariff.
Analysis: The product cleared by the assessee was not treated as a mere mixture of gases, but as impure carbon dioxide emerging in the course of manufacture and sold as such to another unit. Tariff Item 14H covered gases including liquified or solidified gases and specifically included carbonic acid (carbon dioxide). The classification did not turn on technical purity, since the item was known and dealt with in trade as carbon dioxide and marketable in that form. The conversion into a purer form by the recipient was treated as a further manufacturing process and did not alter the position that the product removed by the assessee was carbon dioxide falling within the tariff entry.
Conclusion: The product was correctly classifiable under Tariff Item 14H, against the assessee.
Issue (ii): Whether the assessee was entitled to exemption under Notification No. 40/85 or Notification No. 235/85.
Analysis: Notification No. 40/85 was held inapplicable because the removals were not shown to satisfy its conditions and the goods were not cleared under the relevant Chapter X procedure contemplated by the exemption. Notification No. 235/85, which exempted carbon dioxide not conforming to the specified standard when intended for use in a bottling plant and where the prescribed procedure was followed, was held applicable on the facts, but only from the date the notification came into force. The benefit was not extended retrospectively before its issue.
Conclusion: Notification No. 40/85 was not available, but Notification No. 235/85 was available prospectively from its date of commencement, in favour of the assessee.
Final Conclusion: The classification demand was sustained, while exemption relief was granted only under Notification No. 235/85 from its effective date, resulting in a mixed outcome.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
