2002 (9) TMI 184

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....e period November, 1999 to March, 2000 on the appellants. 2.The appellants are engaged in the manufacture of various items viz. potato chips, masala balls, cheetos wheels and lehar kurkure. The dispute relates to classification of the items namely cheetos wheels and lehar kurkure. The appellants filed declaration wherein they declared these items classifiable under Heading 2108 of the CETA as namkeen and claimed exemption under Notification 5/99 from payment of duty. But the Revenue did not accept that classification and issued show cause notice to the appellants alleging that these items were classifiable under sub-heading 1904.10 of the CETA attracting duty @ 16% ad valorem. In that show cause notice, the duty demand for the period Nov....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....repared, not elsewhere specified or included." The Heading, as is evident from its bare perusal, consists of two parts. The basic requirements for the application of the first part, are that the products must be (i) prepared foods, (ii) such food must be obtained by swelling or roasting and (iii) it should be obtained by swelling or roasting of cereals or cereal products. The second part of this Heading 19.04, specifies exclusion. It excludes the products prepared from corn, flour and meal. The contention raised by the learned SDR is that the products in question fall within the ambit of Heading 19.04. But if we examine the ingredients of these products in question which had been disclosed by the appellants, they do not satisfy the....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... CETA. Both the items in question, are fried products and not obtained by swelling or roasting. 9.Even from the Explanatory Notes to Heading 19.04, of the HSN it is quite evident that this Heading does not cover prepared foods/cereal products obtained by the process other than swelling and roasting. This very view has also been taken by the Tribunal in T.T.K. Pharma Ltd. v. Collector of Central Excise 1993 (63) E.L.T. 446 and CCE, Lucknow v. Nektar Food Products [1996 (88) E.L.T. 421 (T) = 1996 (17) RLT 155]. In the latter decision, it has been made clear by the Tribunal that where several processes are involved and the prepared food is not obtained by swelling or roasting, it will go out of Heading 19.04 of the CETA and would be covered....