TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2020 (8) TMI 743
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ification of quick lime imported by them. He pointed out that the Adjudicating Authority has held that product imported by them is classifiable under heading 28 25 of customs Tariff Act as against heading 25 22 claimed by the appellant. He pointed out that the quick lime is made out of roasted limestone and commonly used for white washing, pan shops and as a reducing agent in many industries like that of appellant. The process of manufacture was described as follows: "Limestone from mine →Roasting (Calcination) (apply heat at about 800 Degree Centrigrade) →Quicklime(of 2522)→ add water (H2O) →Calcium hydroxide (called slaked lime) [gives out quick bubbles, hence name quick lime] →add CO2 →Calcium Carbonate &r....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s obtained by calcining limestone containing very little or no clay. It combines very rapidly with water, giving off considerable heat and producing slaked lime (Calcium hydroxide) The heading excludes purified calcium oxide and calcium hydroxide (heading 28.25)" 2.4 He argued that even if the limestone is roasted or calcined to manufacture Quicklime it would still be classifiable under chapter heading 2522 because the heading itself described that Quicklime is obtained by calcining limestone. Learned Counsel relied on the decision of Tribunal in the case of Ganesh International vs CC, Nagpur 2004 (169) ELT 284 (Tri) wherein it was held that "It cannot be the intention of the legislature to first mention a product under one of the entri....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Ruling Authority cannot be applied in the instant case mechanically. He pointed out that in the said case, the facts of the case were substantially different. In that case, the quicklime manufactured by them was classified under chapter 25 because of earlier ruling of Supreme Court and CESTAT and nil rate of excise duty. The applicant in the said case wanted the product to be classified under chapter 28 and wanted to pay 12% Excise duty. He argued that in the said case, the applicant has persuaded authority that they want to avoid the risk of availing the benefits on the strength of decision rendered in a different context and then facing demand at the later stage. In the said case, Chainman Justice P.V. Reddy had doubted the intention of t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....elied on by Tribunal in the case of Bhadradri Minerals Pvt. Ltd. (supra) wherein it was held that what is covered by Chapter 28.25 is Calcium Oxise which is of 98% purity or more. Learned counsel pointed our that purity of CaO in their imports was 92 to 96%. 3. Learned Departmental Representative argued that test reports submitted by party at the time of import of the subject goods show the CaO percent as 92 to 97%. He explained the process of manufacture from para 14.8 of the SCN. Learned AR relied on the decision of the Tribunal in the case of Nuchem Industries 1999 (105) E.L.T. 711 (Tri). In the said decision, he argued that the said goods were held to be not classifiable under chapter 25. He pointed out that the said decision was uphe....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ision of the Tribunal in the case of Nuchem Industries Pvt. Ltd. (supra) which was upheld by Hon'ble Apex Court. It is seen that the said decision has been given in the context of Central Excise duties. At the material time, Central Excise Tariff was not aligned to HSN. Learned Counsel for the appellant pointed out that the Central excise Tariff was align with HSN only with effect from 20.03.1990. He pointed out that this distinction has been specifically examined by Tribunal in the case of Bhadradri Minerals Pvt.Ltd. (supra) in para 5.1 and 5.2. In view of above, it is apparent that the said decision would render in different circumstances and, therefore, cannot be relied as binding precedent. 4.3 It is seen that the decision of Tribunal....