Customs, Excise and Gold Tribunal - Delhi
Lalitha Imports And Exports vs Collector Of Customs on 27 May, 1987
Equivalent citations: 1987(13)ECC117, 1987(12)ECR917(TRI.-DELHI), 1987(30)ELT955(TRI-DEL)
ORDER D.C. Mandal, Member (T)
1. The appellants imported a consignment described as "Soap Raw Material" TFM 65% Min. Basis (Soap Stock) (Palm Acid oil unprocessed FFA more than 25%). Test report of the sample drawn from the consignment showed that the goods were "Acid Oil". Classification of the goods for the purpose of customs duty is in dispute. The Department has assessed the goods under Heading 15.08/13 of the Central Tariff Act, 1975 and the assessment has been upheld by the Collector (Appeals) in the impugned order. The appellants, in their appeal memo and also through their counsel, have claimed that the goods are classifiable under Heading 15.07 as these are remnant of palm oil after removal of purified oil and for the I.T.C. purpose these have been treated as palm oil. Shri Kunhikrishnan has relied on this Tribunal's decision in the case of Kusum Products Ltd, Calcutta v. Collector of Central Excise, Calcutta, reported in 1985 (19) ELT 479, in which, for the purpose of Central Excise duty acid oil has been classified under Central Excise Tariff Item "12 Vegetable non-essential oil". Smt. Chander, J.D.R., arguing for the respondent has stated that "Acid oil from refining" is a specific entry in Tariff Heading 15.08/13 of the Central Tariff Act, 1975 and hence the goods were correctly classified under this Heading.
2. We find that the Tariff Heading 15.08/13 of the Central Tariff Act, 1975 is specific for "Acid oil from refining". According to the provision of Rule 1 of the Rules for the Interpretation of the First Schedule to the Customs Tariff Act, 1975, classification shall be determined according to the term of the Heading. Rule 3(a) of the said Rules says that the Heading which provides the most specific description shall be preferred to Headings providing a more general description. Acid oil is specifically mentioned in Tariff Heading 15.08/13 and hence, for the purpose of basic customs duty it is classifiable under this Heading. In the Central Excise Tariff, there is no specific entry for acid oil and, therefore, this Tribunal classified it under Tariff Item 12 Vegetable non-essential oil, based on other factors as discussed in the decision reported in 1985 (19) ELT 479. The Customs Act and the Central Excises and Salt Act are two separate and independent enactments. The classification of a product under one Act does not govern the classification under another Act. Similar is the case vis-a-vis classification for the I.T.C. purpose.
3. In the light of the above discussions, we hold that the imported acid oil was correctly assessed under Tariff Heading 15.08/13 of the Central Tariff Act, 1975 without giving the benefit of Notification No. 42/79-Cus., dated 1-3-1979. There is no justification for interfering with the decision of the lower authorities. In the result, we uphold the impugned order and dismiss the appeal.