Custom, Excise & Service Tax Tribunal
M/S. Zeneca Ici Agro Chemicals Ltd vs Commissioner Of Central Excise, ... on 28 March, 2008
IN THE CUSTOMS, EXCISE AND SERVICE TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
SOUTH ZONAL BENCH AT CHENNAI
Appeal No. E/1485/2000
[Arising out of Order-in-Appeal No.93/2000 (M-I) dated 15.09.2000 passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise, Chennai]
For approval and signature:
Honble Mr. P.G.CHACKO, Member (Judicial)
Honble Mr. P.KARTHIKEYAN, Member (Technical)
1. Whether Press Reporters may be allowed to see the Order for publication as per Rule 27 of the CESTAT (Procedure) Rules, 1982? :
2. Whether it should be released under Rule 27 of the
CESTAT (Procedure) Rules, 1982 for publication in any authoritative report or not? :
3. Whether the Members wish to see the fair copy of
the Order? :
4. Whether Order is to be circulated to the Departmental Authorities? :
M/s. Zeneca ICI Agro Chemicals Ltd.
Appellants
Versus
Commissioner of Central Excise, Chennai
Respondent
Appearance :
Shri M. Kannan, Adv. Shri N.J. Kumaresh, SDR For the Appellants For the Respondent CORAM:
Shri P.G. Chacko, Member (Judicial) Shri P. Karthikeyan, Member (Technical) Date of hearing : 28.03.2008 Date of decision : 28.03.2008 Final Order No.____________ Per P. KARTHIKEYAN This appeal filed by M/s. Zeneca ICI Agro Chemicals Ltd., seeks to vacate a demand of Rs. 6,075/- raised on it for the clearance of de-mineralised water (DM water) during the period April, 1998 to August, 1998. The lower authorities have classified the impugned goods as distilled water or conductivity water and water of similar purity under Chapter sub-heading 28.51. As the goods were cleared outside the factory and not captively consumed, the same was classified under sub-heading 2851.19. Assessees claim for classification of the impugned goods under CSH 22.01 was rejected relying on HSN notes at page 322 in terms of which, water purified using ion exchange resins is covered by CSH 2851.
2. Heard both sides. There is no dispute that the impugned goods are extremely pure water. It is used for industrial consumption. The water before treatment and after treatment cannot be held to have same properties and application. The process involved is elaborate. It is not explained how the impugned product is not a manufactured product and not an inorganic compound. The assessee also does not explain how the same is not distilled water or conductivity water or water of similar purity . As per the sub-heading 2851, such water is an inorganic compound of that heading. There is no dispute that such water used within the factory of production falls under CSH 2851.11 and attracts nil rate of duty, whereas the same goods when removed from the factory, are correctly classifiable under Heading 2851.19 and attracts duty liability. Assessee has no case that the same view as in the impugned order held by the Commissioner (A) vide order in appeal A.No.64/99 (M-I) in the assessees own case for an earlier period had been appealed against and had not become final. In the circumstances, we find that the impugned order has correctly upheld the demand of Rs.6,075/- raised on the appellants. We therefore dismiss the appeal.
(Dictated and pronounced in open court)
(P.KARTHIKEYAN) (P.G.CHACKO)
MEMBER (T) MEMBER (J)
ksr
28--03-2008