TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2019 (11) TMI 499
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....eing disposed of together. 2. Appeal No C/25025/2013 is filed by the importer assessee against the demand of differential duty invoking extended period of limitation, confiscation of imported goods, imposition of redemption fine as well as imposition of penalties under Sections 112 & 114AA. Appeal No. C/25026/2013 is filed by Shri Thumma Antony, Plant Manager of the importer firm against imposition of penalties upon him under Section 112 and 114AA. Appeal No C/25027/2013 is filed by Shri Arun Kumar Giri Manager (purchase) of the importer firm against imposition of fine under Section 112, 114AA upon him. 3. Heard both sides and perused the records. The learned counsel for the appellant submits that they have been importing aluminous cement....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....g "high alumina refractory cement". He submits that it is the case of the department that aluminous cement which they have imported and declared as such deserves to be classified as high alumina refractory cement since the alumina content in it is high (more than 50%). The period of dispute is 2006-2011. According to the department, since the cement is classifiable as high alumina refractory cement, the benefit of notification No. 21/2002 Cus dated 01.03.2002 (Sl No 448) and successive notifications was not available to them and therefore, the differential duty is liable to be recovered. He submits that in the first case, there is nothing on record to show that what they have imported is not aluminous cement. When the Tariff was modified in....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... that the Notification No. 21/2002 as well as its successor notifications provided for exemption for aluminous cement used in manufacture of refractory products falling under Chapters 38, 68, or 69. The benefit is available if the aluminous cement which is imported falls under Chapter 25 of the Customs Tariff Act 1985. He would submit that the successor notifications were also worded accordingly. Therefore, the benefit of exemption notification is available as long as (a) what they were using was aluminous cement; (b) it was used for manufacture of refractory products and (c)It fell under Chapter 25 of the Customs Tariff. It is not in dispute that they have been manufacturing refractory products. It is also not in dispute that what they are....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ignments were seized and show-cause notice was issued and after due process impugned order was passed confiscating the seized goods and imposing redemption fine as well as imposing penalties upon the importer and other two appellants in these cases. Differential duty was also demanded from the appellant on this ground. He asserts that but for the investigation conducted by the department, the fact that the importer had imported high alumina refractory cement and mis-declared it as alumina cement would not have come to light. Therefore the appeals do not have any merit and may be rejected. 5. We have considered the arguments of both sides and perused the records. It is not in dispute that the importer appellant has manufactured refractory b....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ent's case has to fail on this ground alone for the extended period of limitation and correspondingly the penalties also need to be set aside. 6. The next question to be examined is, if the imported products is high alumina refractory cement classifiable under 2523 90 20, whether the exemption notification No 21/02 is still available. A plain reading of the notifications shows that the exemption is available for any high alumina cement falling under chapter 25. It does not distinguish between high alumina cement and low alumina cement. If the intention of the notification was to confine it to aluminous cement falling under a specific heading of the Customs Tariff, it would have said so. From the documents produced before us, we have no dou....