Just a moment...

Report
ReportReport
Welcome to TaxTMI

We're migrating from taxmanagementindia.com to taxtmi.com and wish to make this transition convenient for you. We welcome your feedback and suggestions. Please report any errors you encounter so we can address them promptly.

Bars
Logo TaxTMI
>
×

By creating an account you can:

Report an Error
Type of Error :
Please tell us about the error :
Min 15 characters0/2000
TMI Blog
Home /

1988 (1) TMI 212

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....he process of manufacture of complex fertilisers by the mixture of Mono-Ammonium Phosphate Urea and muriate of Potash, a new chemical compound comes into existence or, in other words, whether Mono-Ammonium Phosphate, loses its physical and chemical properties in the complex fertiliser which is ultimately produced. The Appellate Tribunal will decide the question after giving the parties an opportunity of producing materials in support of their respective contentions and after giving them an opportunity of being heard." 2. To understand the controversy in hand it would be useful to state the few facts. The appellants are manufacturers of Chemical fertilisers. They manufacture, among other things, complex or mixed fertilisers. For the manufac....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....irected. It appears that the appellants wrote a detailed letter to the Ministry of Finance, Government of India on 11.8.1979 but they did not get any reply to their said letter and in the meantime the Assistant Collector of Customs issued a show cause notice to the appellants calling upon them to show cause why duty amounting to Rs. 60,34,419.56, which was short levied, should not be recovered from them and ultimately confirmed the said demand by his order dated 20.2.1980. Being aggrieved, the appellants went in appeal to the Collector of Customs (Appeals) who by his order dated 1.7.1982 rejected the appeal holding that, as the imported MAP had not been used as manure directly, the exemption under Notification No. 178/76 was correctly denie....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....d experience to show that he is an Expert. In his affidavit he had referred 6 Annexures. Annexure-1 is the process description which sets out the details of the process employed by the appellant company during the relevant period for the manufacture of complex fertilisers. The said Annexure is duly supported by the 'diagram' and process description. Annexure-2 is a copy of the test report of School of Chemistry of Andhra University certifying that there was no chemical reaction between MAP and NH3 vapour, that is to say, that there was no chemical reaction at all in the Granulator between the Ammonia and the imported MAP within the normal 2 to 3 minutes retention time (process time) in the Granulator. Annexure-3 is the 'technical note' of t....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....therefore, convinced that no chemical reaction has occurred in the process of manufacture with mono-ammonium phosphate used in the CFL plant and the MAP so added has retained its physical and chemical characteristics in the complex fertilisers produced. The mono-ammonium phosphate should have retained its identity and entered the soil as MAP even when converted into complex fertiliser by the process of manufacture adopted by M/s. CFL." 4. 'When the case was called for hearing Shri A.S. Sunder Rajan, learned JDR with his usual fA.I.R.ness stated that in view of the said affidavit of Dr. V.N. Rao, Manager - Operations and the report of the Fertilisers Association of India he does not dispute the fact that in the process of manufacture of com....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ond the directions given by the Hon'ble Supreme Court and to contend that as the MAP is not used by the appellant directly as a manure, Notification No. 178/76 is not applicable. Shri Ganesh further drew our attention to paras 9, 10, 11 and 12 of the remand order passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court to show that all these contentions were raised during the course of hearing before the Hon'ble Supreme Court by the learned Attorney General but did not find favour with the Supreme Court. 5. We have considered the contentions raised by the parties. From the remand order we find that on behalf of the Collector of Customs, Madras it was contended by the Attorney General that since the Mono-Ammonium Phosphate was not used by the appellant directly....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....250. Thus the contentions raised by the learned JDR that Tribunal can go beyond the scope of remand order cannot be entertained. 6. As observed above the learned J.D.R. has not disputed the fact that in the process of manufacture of complex fertilisers by the mixture of MAP, Urea and Muriate of Potash, no new chemical compound comes into existence but has disputed that there is a change in the physical form of the imported materials going into the complex fertilisers. We find from the evidence placed before us and referred to in the preceding paragraph that Mono-Ammonium Phosphate continues to be present as such and it gets only agglomerated. In the agglomerated materials it has not been shown that in any way physical property of the const....