Customs, Excise and Gold Tribunal - Mumbai
Hoechst Schering Agrevo Ltd., Meghmani ... vs Commissioner Of Central Excise on 25 September, 2003
Equivalent citations: 2004(169)ELT289(TRI-MUMBAI)
ORDER Jyoti Balasundaram, Member (J)
1. The above appeals arise out of two separate orders involving an identical issue and are hence heard together and disposed of by this common order.
2. M/s. Hoechst Schering AgrEvo Ltd. and M/s. Meghmani Organics Ltd. manufacture pesticides technical grade as well as formulations and clear the same on payment of duty at the rate applicable to goods falling under sub-heading 3808,10 of the schedule to the Central Excise Tariff Act, which reads as under:-
"Insecticides, rodenticides, fungicides, herbicides, anti-sprouting products and plant-growth regulators, disinfectants and similar products, put up in forms or packings for retail sale or as preparations or articles (for example, sulphur-treated bands, wicks and candles, and flypapers)."
3. According to the department, the above heading covered only products which are put up for retail sale or as preparation/article and since the goods manufactured by the two appellants above mentioned had not been put up in forms or packing for retail sale or as preparations or articles, but were cleared in bulk, they fell for classification under CETA sub-heading 2942.00. Show cause notices 13.1.1998 and 22.12.1997 respectively were issued, proposing recovery of differential duty of Rs. 1,88,77,845/- on clearances by M/s. Hoechst Schering AgrEvo Ltd. during the period 23.7.1996 to 31.8.1997, and Rs. 3,44,65,910/- on clearances by M/s. Meghmani Organics Ltd. for the same period. The notices also proposed imposition of penalty. The notices were adjudicated by separate orders of adjudication wherein the demands were confirmed along with penalties of equal amounts. Penalty of Rs. 4 lakhs was imposed on the managing director of M/s. Meghmani Organics Ltd. Hence these appeals.
4. We have heard both sides. We find that the issue is no longer res integra, as it has been settled by the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of UOI v. Pesticides Mfg. & Formulalors Association of India 2002 (146) ELT 19 (SC) wherein it has been held that technical grade pesticides in bulk form are covered under heading 38.08 and not under Chapters 28 or 29 of the schedule to the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985.
5. Following the ratio of the above judgment which directly covers the issue in dispute, we set aside the impugned orders and allow the appeals.