TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2008 (8) TMI 82
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....14/- Rs. 3,000/- E/888/ 2007 OIA No. 39 & 40 dt. 31-8-2007 Rs. 19 98 332/- Rs. 39,967/- Rs. 10000/- Nil E/891/2007 Rs. 15,39,053/- Rs. 30,781/- Rs. 15,000/- Nil 2. Shri K.S. Ravi Shankar and R. Dakshina Murthy, learned advocates appeared on behalf of the appellants. Shri K. Sambi Reddi, learned departmental representative appeared on behalf of the Revenue. He argued forcefully referring extensively to HSN Notes. 3. We heard both sides. The issue involved in all these appeals is the correct classification of a product called 'Poha'. The appellants classify them either in Chapter 10 failing which under Chapter 11 of the Central Excise Tariff, whereas, the department is of the view that it would be classifiable under Chap....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....edium preheated to about 130 degree Celsius. * This process brings softness to the paddy. * Then the paddy is fed into the edge runner having two rollers for pressing which results in rice flakes or beaten rice or poha etc. * It is then sieved for separating the flakes from the broken rice and husk. * Subsequently, the hot rice flakes/poha are kept for natural cooling. * The cooled poha/rice flakes are packed in 500 Gm and 1 kg unit containers (Polythylene bags) and jute gunny bags of 5 kg, 10 kg, 30 kg and 60 kg. 3.2 Further, the learned SDR stated that the Poha is a manufactured product and it answers the description of Chapter 1904, the description of which is already given above. He said that the Commissioner has elaborately discu....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ders deal with the same issue, we are taking them up together for common order. 4. The learned advocate stated that the Adjudicating Authority has not properly applied the provisions of law to the impugned product. According to the learned advocate, the impugned product is only one form of rice. For this, they relied on certain decisions of the Supreme Court and some other judicial decisions. It was also pointed out that the case-law relied on by the Commissioner has been overruled by the Larger Bench decision in the Mahavir Food Products & Ors. v. CCE, Vadodara and vice versa - 2007 (211) EL.T. 29 (Tri.-LB) wherein it is held that harmonious construction of the two Headings 19.04 and 11.04 shows that if flakes processed to an extent cover....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ered as cooked food. Even the High Court held that fryums to be cooked food but the Hon'ble Apex Court reversed the decision on the ground that fryums were not cooked food and they were undercooked items which could not be consumed directly. It was strongly emphasized that avalakki or poha has to be further cooked before it can be taken. It may be edible but it cannot be considered as cooked food. It was also emphasized that the classification of the item is one of the interpretation of the statute and there is no justification in invoking the extended period because there is actually no suppression of facts involved. A large number of case laws were also cited. It was further emphasized that even though the avalakki is packed in 10 kg, 15 ....