TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2026 (9) TMI 1296
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....er ingredients for the purpose of their use in animal feeding from its related overseas supplier M/s DSM Nutrients Asia Pacific Private Limited, Singapore, a global supplier of innovative feed additives for livestock, aquaculture and companion animals. Some of the goods imported by the appellants are covered by the product line of premixes of vitamins, premixes containing minerals for feed grade/feed additives and preparations with enzymes for feed grade/animal grade, that are used in preparation of animal feeds. The main products under import in the category of 'premixes of vitamins' are (i) Rovimix B12 1% FG (ii) Rovimix A 1000 (iii) Rovimix AD3 1000/200 (iv) Rovimix B2 80-SD (v) Rovimix Biotin HP (vi) Rovimix D3-500 (vii) Rovimix E-50 Adsorbate (viii) Rovimix Hy.D 1.25% (ix) Rovimix STAY-C 35 (x) Vitamin B1 Mononitrate (xi) Rovimix B6 (xii) Rovimix Folic 80 SD (xiii) Rovimix Niacin (xiv) Rovimix A 500 WS (xv) Rovimix K3 MNB (xvi) Rovimix Calpan (xvii) Rovimix BCarotene 10%. Further, product line 'preparation with enzymes for feed grade/ animal grade' are of the following: (xvii) Ronozyme HiPhos (GT) (xviii) Ronozyme HiPhos [M] (xix) Ronozyme Pro Act [CT] (xx) Ronozyme VP [CT] (x....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....the provisional assessments by 17.09.2022. On the above basis, the appellants were given personal hearing on 05.09.2022 and their submissions were taken on record on 17.09.2022. Further information was also sought by the department vide letters dated 14.12.2022, 20.01.2023 seeking the classification information declared by the supplier and the reply of the appellants was received by the department on 10.03.2023. The appellants had also attended personal hearings before the adjudicating authority on 15.11.2022, 17.04.2023, 28.08.2023. 2.4 On the above basis, the Assistant Commissioner of Customs, as original authority had passed Order-in-Original dated 22.09.2023 in deciding the classification of impugned goods under CTH 2936 and 3507, by rejecting the classification claimed by the appellants under CTH 2309, and finalized the assessments under Section 18(2) of the Customs Act, 1962 and demanded the differential duty on such revised classification; and confirmed the duty demands along with interest; as well as ordered for appropriation of the same from the duty deposits made by the appellants. However, the exact amount of duty demanded, confirmed or appropriated was not mentioned ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s dismissed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in its judgement dated 07.02.2025, and thus he claimed that the issue is settled in favour of the party, and the classification issue is no more under dispute. He had also brought to the attention of the Bench, the fact that chemical test report of representative samples of impugned goods given by Deputy Chief Chemist (DYCC) of Central Revenue Control Laboratory of the department in their case, when compared to that of the case of Venkateshwara B.V. Bio Corp Private Limited (supra) are same and therefore learned Counsel claimed that on such basis, the present appeals filed by the appellants may also be allowed. 4.1 Learned Authorised Representative (AR) reiterated the findings made by the Commissioner of Customs (Appeals) in the impugned order and submitted that issue of classification of impugned goods, has been examined in detail by the authorities below. 5. We have heard both sides and perused the case records and additional paper books submitted in this case by both sides along with case law citations provided by them. 6. The issue involved herein is to decide the classification of impugned goods viz., 'premixes of vitamins'; an....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ethod of classification, the first category are the enzymes in which the molecules consist solely of a protein (e.g. pepsin, tripsin, urease, the second are the enzymes in which the molecules consist of a protein combined with a non-protein compound of low molecular weight, acting as a cofactor. The cofactor may either be a metal or a complex organic molecule called coenzyme. In the other scheme, enzymes can be referred to according to their chemical activity (e.g. hydrolases, lyases, isomerases) or biological activity (e.g. amylases, lipases, proteases etc.). According to the explanatory notes, the heading 3507 includes pure (isolated) enzymes, used mainly in medicines or in scientific research; enzymatic concentrates which may contain several enzymes in various proportions and capable of being standardized or stabilized and are obtained from animal organs, plants, microorganisms, or culture broths; and prepared enzymes by further diluting the enzymatic concentrates. 17. In light of relevant chapter notes and HSN explanatory notes as summarized in the preceding paragraphs, it appears that the enzymes of any type are classifiable in chapter heading 3507 and the vitamins ar....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....hapter heading 3507 are the only appropriate heading for enzymes and enzymatic preparations and any attempt to take out enzymes from the ambit of chapter 35 is like defeating the purpose of having enzymes in chapter 35. I find that both the tariff headings 2309 and 3507 have their individual characteristic merits and appeal for specific nature of goods but when tested against each other and going by the submissions in form of product literature and the certificate of analysis, CTH 3507appears to be more appropriate for the products under consideration falling under the ambit of enzymes and enzyme preparations. xxx xxx xxx xxx 21. After going through the both HS code and explanatory notes to both the heading i.e. 2309 and 3507 I hold that the products-premixes of vitamins i.e. (a) Rov B12-1%, (b) RovA 1000, (c) Rov AD3 1000/200, (d) RovB2 80 SD, (e) Rov Biotin HP, (f Rov D3 500, (g) Rov E50 Adsorbate, (h) Rov Hy. D, (i) Rov Stay C, (i) Rovimix B1/ Vitamin B1 Mononitrate, (k) Rovimix B6, (l) Rovimix Folic 80 SD, (m) Rovimix Niacin, (n) Rovimix A 500 WS, (o) Rov K3 MB, (p) RovCalpan, (q) Rovimix Beta Carotene, (r) Rovimix B12 1% FG are rightly classifiable under head....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... of CETA. The relevant paragraphs of the said decision are extracted and given below: "The present reference has arisen out of the decision of this Tribunal in the case of M/s. Tetragon Chemie (P) Ltd. Two Members had differed. One of the Members suggested that the matter should be referred to the Larger Bench in view of the fact that the Tribunal in the case of M/s. Roche Products Limited; in the case of M/s. Glaxo Labs (I) Limited; in the case of M/s. Punjab Bone Mills and in the case of M/s. Protin Kem had held that the goods were classifiable under Heading 23.02 of Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985 (CETA 1985) and that in the case of M/s. Ranbaxy Laboratories Ltd., the Tribunal had held that the goods were classifiable under Heading 29.36 of CETA 1985. Therefore, a reference was made to the third Member who held that the matter may be referred to the Larger Bench. Accordingly, the issue was formulated as 'Whether preparations of a kind used in animal feeding consisting of one or more vitamins mixed with diluents etc. are classifiable under Heading 29.36 as held in the case of M/s. Ranbaxy Laboratories Limited or under Heading 23.02 as held in the case of M/s. Glaxo Labs ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....d additives under CTH 2309 and not under CTH 2923. The relevant extract of the said order is given below: "4. After going through these detailed analysis and statutory provisions, we do not find any reason to defer with the conclusion arrived at by him, particularly in view of the clarification issued by the Department of Revenue vide Instruction No. 34/2022. Even from factual matrix, we find that in none of these cases, the Department has drawn any sample to fortify their argument that the product will fall under CETH 2923900. On the other hand, as observed by the Commissioner (Appeals), the product literature provided by the Appellant very clearly shows that these all are part of Animal Feed and not fit for Human consumption for preparation of medicines. Again as observed by the Commissioner (Appeals) no tests have taken up before the classification is changed arbitrarily. Therefore, we dismiss the Appeals filed by the Revenue and allow the Appeals filed by the Appellant with consequential relief, if any, as per law." The aforesaid order of the Tribunal was also upheld by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Civil Appeal Diary No.21286 of 2024 by dismissing the appeal preferr....