TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2005 (7) TMI 122
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... mere rubbing with a duster, just like writing with chalk. 2.The appellants contend that classification of these marker inks would be under sub-heading 3215.10 as "writing ink' and would attract duty at NIL rate. Revenue authorities have held that the classification would be under 3215.90 as 'other' (inks) attracting duty at 16%. The controversy has arisen in regard to imported consignments, inasmuch as imported goods attract additional duty of customs at rates equivalent to Central Excise duty on goods manufactured in India. 3.Before we go into the arguments of both sides, we may first note the competing tariff heading :- Heading 32.15 of the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985 Heading 32.15 of the Customs Tariff : 32.15 Printing ink, wr....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....6.The Revenue contends that the Central Excise classification canvassed by the appellant is an impermissible expansion of the scope of the entry 'writing ink' and a drastic curtailment of the scope of the entry 'other' inks. It is also being submitted that such an expansion is contrary to HSN explanatory notes to Heading 3215. It is being pointed out that explanatory notes to HSN have delineated the area in which each of the categorizations (printing ink, writing ink and other inks operates. It is of particular significance that the notes have included only "ordinary" writing or drawing inks under the category of 'writing and drawing inks'. The notes have left other than ordinary writing or writing inks in the category of 'other' inks. It i....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....DR points out that the interpretation placed by the appellant on Rule 5 is not correct inasmuch as that rule specifically says that even Chapter and Section notes are relevant "unless the context otherwise requires". Learned SDR has also brought to our notice that the Tribunal has relied on HSN notes while deciding the same issue in the earlier decision in the case of CCE, Mumbai v. Camlin Limited - 2002 (144) E.L.T. 638 and that judgment was following an earlier judgment in the case of CCE, New Delhi v. Technik Industries -2000 (120) E.L.T. 123 passed in the light of HSN notes. 9.It is clear from what is stated above that there are several decisions of this Tribunal in support of the Revenue's contention, while the contentions on behalf o....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... addition of gum Arabic, shellac, etc.), or in certain animal glues. (C) Other inks in this heading include : (1) Copying and hectographic inks (ordinary inks thickened with glycerol, sugar, etc.). (2) Inks for ball point pens. (3) Inks for duplicating machines or for impregnating ink-pads or typewriter ribbons. (4) Marking inks (e.g., based on silver nitrate). (5) Metallic inks (finely divided metals or alloys in suspension in a solution of gum, e.g., gold, silver or bronze inks). (6) ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ens, marking inks etc. The inks under consideration are marking inks. 12.Any effort to interpret this entry without regard to the notes creates confusion about other entries in the tariff also. The note seeks to remove such confusion by mentioning the items which are excluded from 3215 such as developers used in photocopying 'machine', refills for ball point fountain pens, etc. The note clarifies that refills for ball point fountain pen comprising the ball point and ink will fall under Heading 9608 which is for miscellaneous manufactured articles. Thus, it is not practicable to undertake excise or custom classification under Heading 3215 without reference to the HSN notes to that heading. 13.We are not able to agree with the learned Couns....