TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2020 (8) TMI 615
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....on, samples were drawn from the imports made under different Bills of Entries, and the Kandla Customs Laboratory reported that the goods were "Uncoated Precipitated Calcium Carbonate". Since the Precipitated Calcium Carbonate is not a mineral product, but a chemical classifiable under CTH 2836 5000, differential duty demand of 2.5% BCD was raised vide SCN on the Appellant in respect of imports made under 56 Bills of Entry, compared to NIL BCD assessed in such BEs at the time of import made under CTH 2503 9030. The said demand stands confirmed vide the impugned order along with interest, apart from confiscation, redemption fine and penalties being imposed on the Appellant. 3. Shri. S.R. Dixit, Ld. Counsel appearing for the appellants argued....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....3.2 He further argued that the most crucial aspect to determine whether a product is precipitated Calcium Carbonate or Calcite powder, is to check for "Oil Absorption ratio" and "particle size", which determines whether the Calcium Carbonate is precipitated or natural. This was also taken due note of by the Hon'ble CESTAT in the case of 20 Microns (supra). Since the Kandla Lab had no facility to test the product in question at all, and did not test particle size anyway, the said test reports clearly need to be discarded. Without prejudice, It is his submission that in any case, the findings of test reports should be restricted to particular lot of goods imported under respective BEs and not to all past imports. The Appellant also claims to ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....filed under CTH 28 and not CTH 25, does not determine correct classification of the goods imported by the Appellant. The Appellant imported the said products by classifying it under Chapter 28 after January 2014, since there was no revenue implication involved on account of rationalization of BCD under Chapter 25 and 28 on Calcium carbonate for imports from ASEAN countries and in any case there is no estoppel against the law. 3.5 He also submits that the appellant has since bonafidely declared the goods in the Bills of Entry on the basis of import documents, there is no suppression of facts on their part, therefore, extended period ought not to have been invoked. 4. On the other hand, Shri. T.G. Rathod, Ld. Joint Commissioner (Authorised ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....r calcite powder, their Labs were not equipped to test the same till 2019, as evident from Circular No.43/2017-Cus dt.16.11.17 as also Circular No.15/2019-Cus dt.7.6.19, the Kandla Customs Chemical Lab reports as relied upon in the impugned order have to be discarded. The various case laws as relied upon by the Appellant, duly based on the said Board Circular dt.16.11.17, in the context of classification of calcite powder and precipitated calcium carbonate, are well founded and apply to the present case on all fours. The present case is identical to that in the case of 20 Microns (supra) as also Manikya Creations and Pavas Polychem (supra). It therefore must be held that in absence of any independent cogent evidence to reject the classifica....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... goods in present case was "sand" and not "powder" may otherwise suggest that the goods in question was not precipitated Calcium Carbonate at all, since particle size is of great importance, apart from Oil Absorption ratio, in light of the various case laws relied upon by the Appellant. 9. Under the circumstances, there is no option but to go by the technical data sheet/description provided by overseas supplier for the products in question. Nowhere the suppliers refer to the product to be of "Precipitated" form at all. In fact, the presence of other minerals, the Oil Absorption Ratio shown in the technical data sheet otherwise show that the product in question is not Precipitated and hence, the classification sought for by the Appellant un....