TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2007 (7) TMI 391
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Examiner who tested a sample of the goods reported as follows :- "The sample is in the form of white powder. It is composed of a preparation containing Vitamin-E and inorganic substances (silica). Such compositions are known to find use as feed additive in animal feeds. Percentage of inorganic substance (silica) = 44.6%; percentage of Vitamin - E = balance." From the test report, it appeared to the Customs authorities that the major ingredient was Vitamin-E and that silica was used as filler. On this basis, they took the view that the goods would appropriately be classifiable under CTH 2936.28 attracting basic Customs duty (a) 35% and under CETH 2936.00 attracting CVD @ 16%. Accordingly, a demand notice was issued for recovery of the diff....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... original test report and subsequent clarification thereon, learned Commissioner (Appeals) took the view that the goods would go out of the scope of Heading 29.36 and would consequently be classifiable under Heading 23.09. 3. Heard both sides. Relying on the Chemical Examiner's report and taking aid from Hawley's Condensed Chemical Dictionary, learned SDR submitted that the item imported by the respondents was Tocopherol (Vitamin-E) adsorbed on silica. She pointed out that silica was an anti-caking agent used as a stabilizer for Vitamin-E for the purpose of its preservation or transport. On these facts, she relied on Note 1(f) in Chapter 29 (Organic Chemicals) of the CTA Schedule. This note says that the Headings of Chapter 29 apply t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....able for specific use rather than for general use. Learned Consultant, on the other hand, pointed out that the Tribunal's decision in Ranbaxy Laboratories Ltd. v. Collector - 1994 (72) E.L.T. 197 (Tribunal) relied on by the appellant had been set aside by the Supreme Court as per judgment dated 17-12-2002 in Civil Appeal No. 2284/95 vide 2003 (152) E.L.T. A92 (S.C.). He submitted that the lower appellate authority had correctly classified the item under SH 2309.90 on the basis of its end-use. He pointed out that the Chemical Examiner's report certified the end-use viz. additive in animal feeds. He submitted that the appellant also had not disputed the fact that the imported item was a product of a kind used in animal feeding 4. After ....