TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2023 (11) TMI 1420
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ccording to Harmonised System of Nomenclature (HSN) to qualify for classification under chapter heading 2601 to 2617 processes of ore concentration allowed include physical, physio-chemical operation provided they are normal to the preparation of the ore for the extraction of metal and such operation must not alter the chemical composition of the basic compound. Such operations include crushing, grinding, magnetic separation, gravimetric, separation and floatation. It is stated that by virtue of chapter note 4 to chapters 26 of the Central Excise Tariff Act, (1985 with effect from 01.03.2011) the activity of processing/conversion of ore into concentrate (washing, crushing, screening, drying etc.) in relation to items of this chapter amounts to manufacture. It is therefore the contention of the department that the manganese ore imported by the respondent importer was concentrate and therefore the imported goods were not eligible for benefit of CVD under Notification No. 4/2006-CE dated 01.03.2006. 3. The learned Commissioner (Appeals) vide his order referred to supra has however, held that the appellant in the present matter was eligible for the benefit of Notification No. 4/2006....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ion to the goods specified in the Third Schedule, involves packing or repacking of such goods...... 5. Repudiating the arguments of the department, the learned Advocate Shri N.K Chowdhury for the appellant submitted that the department's claim were without any basis, that they had imported manganese ore only and were therefore rightly eligible for claiming the benefit of the exemption Notification No. 4/2006- CE dated 01.03.2006. The same has therefore been rightly allowed to them, by the learned Commissioner (A). He also pointed out that the department could not point out any discrepancy at the time of the examination of the imported goods, as the imported goods were examined thoroughly by the examining officer, nor did the department, undertake any test of the said goods to substantiate their case. Further, he vehemently argued that when an expression in the exemption notification is clear and there is no ambiguity, nothing can be interpreted beyond the plain words of the notification. That the language of the said notification is quite clear and the Sr. No. 4 of the notification covers the goods imported by them, in the instant case with Nil condition. He further added th....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....is notification and the Condition number of which is referred to in the corresponding entry in column (5) of the Table aforesaid. Explanation .- For the purposes of this notification, the rates specified in column (4) of the said Table are ad valorem rates, unless otherwise specified. S. No. Chapter or heading or sub-heading or tariff item of the First Schedule Description of Excisable goods Rate Condition No. (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) ...... . ....... ......... 4. 2601 to 2617 Ores Nil - Further, note 2 of chapter 26 under Central Excise tariff reads as under: "17. Note 2 of Chapter 26 under Central Excise Tariff reads as under: 2. For the purposes of headings 2601 to 2617, the term "ores" means minerals of mineralogical species actually used in the metallurgical industry for the extraction of mercury, of the metals of heading 2844 or of the metals of Section XIV or XV, even if they are intended for non-metallurgical purposes. Headings 2601 to 2617 do not, however, include minerals which have been submitted to processes not normal to the metallurgical industry." 7. Two questions therefo....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ad observed thus :- "In interpreting a taxing statute, equitable considerations are entirely out of place. Nor can taxing statutes be interpreted on any presumptions or assumptions. The Court must look squarely at the words of the statute and interpret them. It must interpret a taxing statute in the light of what is clearly expressed: it cannot imply anything which is not expressed; it cannot import provisions in the statutes so as to supply any assumed deficiency" 7.3. Justice G.P. Singh in his treatise the "Principles of Statutory Interpretation" (Sixth Edition 1966) has written that: "The well-established rule in the familiar words of LORD WENSLEYDALE, reaffirmed by LORD HALSBURY and LORD SIMONDS, means: "The subject is not to be taxed without clear words for that purpose; and also that every Act of Parliament must be read according to the natural construction of its words". In a classic passage LORD CAIRNS stated that the principle thus: "If the person sought to be taxed comes within the letter of the law he must be taxed, however great the hardship may appear to be, to the judicial mind. On the other hand, if the Crown seeking to recover the tax, cannot br....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rted cargo. No representative samples were drawn and got tested by the department. To maintain that any, manufacturing process had actually been undertaken on the subject goods therefore lacks credence. Physical processes said to be undertaken on the ore, are actually in the nature of dressing of the ore for purpose of export and not in particular aimed at generating concentrate out of the ore. Before enabling the export of the goods mined from the earth, it would certainly require crushing, screening or washing for purpose of shipment. It has nowhere been claimed by the department that the processes undertaken at the suppliers end, in effect, resulted in enhancing the purity of the manganese resulting in the generation of concentrate. The Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Manganese Ore India Limited versus State of Madhya Pradesh (Civil Appeal 2464/2016) has observed as under: 21. (Ref :- Manganese Ore India Ltd. Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh & Ors. [Civil Appeal No. 2464 of 2016 arising out of S.L.P. (Civil) No. 9246 of 2012] Civil Appeal Nos. 2465-2467 of 2016 arising out of S.L.P. (Civil) Nos. 10643-10645 of 2012],) "2. As the commonality of controversy cent....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rding to the appellant, its activities consist of two distinct parts. First is mining, that is, drilling, blasting and collecting of ore which is carried on at mine pit. This activity is carried on in the mine area registered under the Mines Act, 1952. The second is processing, which is carried on at the primary crusher, the secondary crusher and the Concentrator Plant. The processing (manufacturing) part of the activities are carried on in the factory area. The primary crusher, the secondary crusher, the bal mill, the Concentrator Plant, the tailing pumps, the intake well and the water treatment plant are situated away from the mine, at distances varying from 2.5 km to 10 km and are registered separately as a "factory" under the provisions of the Factories Act, 1948. The open pit mine (mining area) and the processing plants/machineries (factory area) are all situated in a large tract of land taken on mining lease from the State Government. 8. The two-Judge Bench adverted to the chronology of the case and noted that the principal grievance of the appellant therein pertains to the definition of "mine" the effect of which is to make processing as part of mining and the presc....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....mined and not a new product created by using or processing the mineral mined." 10.2. The sum total of the various processes to which the ores are subjected to, in order to separate and discard their worthless fractions by essentially physical means are called "Ore Dressing". The various modes of Ore Dressing include handpicking, sorting, screening, washing, jigging, magnetic separation, crushing, grinding, etc. In this process, there is no change in the chemical composition and properties of mined mineral, before and after processing/dressing to make it saleable. It is important to point out that mineral/dressing is a subject matter of Mineral processing. 11. The respondent further relies on the Tribunal's decision in the case of Amba River Coke Ltd. Vs. Pr. Commissioner of Customs (Prev.) Mumbai [2022 (381) ELT 704 T], the relevant para of the said decision are enumerated as below: "29. What need to be now examined is whether Iron Ore Carajas Sohar supplied from Oman, which is a blend of Iron Ore Carajas and Iron Ore concentrate, in which the proportion of Iron Ore Carajas is 90-95% and that of Iron Ore concentrate is 5-10%, is a concentrate or not. The process ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....it only undertakes dry processing. 31. The contention of Learned Special Counsel for the Department that since Carajas is in the region where it rains almost the entire year, the processes carried out for removal of impurities cannot be said to be without the use of water, cannot be accepted. This submission overlooks the fact that only crushing and screening activities were undertaken at Carajas, Para, Brazil and that neither of the two would result in separation of part or whole of the foreign matter, which is a pre-requisite for concentrating the ore. This apart, the show cause notice has not made any reference to the aforesaid pictorial extract from the website. 32. Learned Special Counsel for the Department also contended that the imported iron ore was not the one that was naturally extracted, but an ore which was subjected to processes crushing, screening, blending. To make it fit for direct use in pellet making. In support of this contention, the Learned Special Counsel for the Department relied upon the Technical Analysis report dated 6-5-2016 by Professor Reathod, VJTI and a letter dated 28-4-2016 of Shri D.K. Swamy, Administrative Officer, Indian Bureau ....