2025 (11) TMI 1463

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....he order passed by the original Adjudicating Authority. 2. The issue, in brief, is that the appellant had filed two into bond Bill of Entries for bonding 1959.840 MT of "Liquified Petroleum Gas - Butane", which was provisionally assessed. The items was classified under CTH 2711 1300 and duty was charged @ 10% BCD+16%CVD+2% Excise Education Cess and 2% Customs Education Cess amounting to total duty of Rs. 1,19,62,219/-, which was also paid by the appellant. However, subsequently, the appellant filed a Refund claim seeking the refund of the said amount on the grounds that their imported goods are classifiable under heading CTH 2711 1900 as "others" and therefore, eligible for benefit of Sl. No. 75(E) of Customs Notification No. 21/2002 and....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ot take place in the form of LPG and it has to be in the form of Butane or Propane only and has to be sold without undertaking any processing in Indian market, as LPG and therefore, correct classification should have been 2711.19 and not 2711.13. The appellant also relied on the Notification No. 37/2005-Cus and Notification No. 18/2005, both 02.05.2005 to support their submissions that the intention of the Government was to bring the imported duty burden to NIL to oil industry, who import Butane and Propane, which is sold to house hold and domestic consumers as LPG. It was also argued that since the term "Liquified Propane Gas (LPG)" has not been defined in Central Excise Tariff Act, the same has to be understood in popular sense as LPG as ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....e Cochin Refineries Ltd., Vs Commissioner of Central Excise, Cochin [2001 (132) ELT 619 (Tri-Bang)] and Commissioner of Customs (Import), Mumbai Vs Aegis Logistics Ltd., [2014 (308) ELT 135 (Tri-Mum)], in support that commercial butane and LPG in accordance with the IS standards are classifiable under heading 2711.19. His another alternative argument is that the amendment to the Notification 27/2002-Customs vide Notification No. 37/2005-Customs is an amendment by way of substitution and therefore, it is retrospective in nature. In this regard, he is relying on the judgment of The Hassan Co-operative Milk Producers Societies Union Ltd., Vs State of Karnataka [AIR 2014 Kant 120], wherein, it was held that an amendment by way of substitution, ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....that the matter is no longer res-integra in view of the decisions of two Co-ordinate Benches, whereby, in the appeals filed by the same company i.e. HPCL, has been dismissed on the very same issue. He is relaying on the judgment in the case of Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Ltd., Vs Commissioner of Central Excise, Pune-I vide Final Order No. A/85651/2020 dated 12.06.2020 [2020 (9) TMI 561 - CESTAT, Mumbai], wherein, inter alia, it was held that for the period prior to 02.05.2005, the notification did not contain all the three chapter sub-headings like Entry No. 75E of Notification No. 37/ 2005-Customs dated 02.05.2005 and therefore, relying on the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Commissioner of Customs (Import), Mumbai Vs ....