Commissioner of C. Ex. Vs. Eastern Aromatic Pvt. Ltd.

Commissioner of C. Ex. vs Eastern Aromatic Pvt. Ltd.

Type Court Judgment Court Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai Decided Oct 04, 2006

~2 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/43792

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

Citation: sooperkanoon.com/43792
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Judge: J Balasundaram, Vice-, V T M.
Decided On: Oct 04, 2006
Subject: Education

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Education

Key legal issue: Education

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Commissioner of C. Ex.

Respondent

Eastern Aromatic Pvt. Ltd.

Legal References

Reported In: (2006)(104)ECC401

Excerpt

1. the issue in dispute in this appeal relates to classification of 'geraniol' manufactured by the respondents herein - whether under central excise tariff sub-heading 2905.90 as an acyclic alcohol, as claimed by the assessee and upheld by the commissioner (appeals), or as mixture of odoriferous substances, under chapter heading 33.02 as proposed by the revenue.2. we have heard shri ajay saxena, learned s.d.r. and perused the records, none appears for the respondents in spite of notice.3. in terms of hsn explanatory notes 'geraniol' would be classifiable under heading 3302 provided it contains 50% to 70% of 'geraniol' alongwith varying amounts of citronellol and nerol and that the substance must be in admixture with some other substance. the chemical examiner does not describe the sample as a mixture but only opines that "the sample is in the form of yellow coloured liquid having aroma. it has the characteristics of geraniol - an organic chemical." therefore, classification of the product in dispute under heading 33.02 is ruled out. it is rightly classifiable under chapter heading 29.05 in the light of hsn sub-notes which describe geraniol as an acyclic alcohol being an unsaturated monohydric alcohol..4. in the light of the above, no interference with the impugned order is called for and we accordingly uphold the same and reject the appeal.

Full Judgment

1. The issue in dispute in this appeal relates to classification of 'Geraniol' manufactured by the respondents herein - whether under Central Excise Tariff Sub-heading 2905.90 as an Acyclic alcohol, as claimed by the assessee and upheld by the Commissioner (Appeals), or as mixture of Odoriferous substances, under Chapter Heading 33.02 as proposed by the Revenue.

2. We have heard Shri Ajay Saxena, learned S.D.R. and perused the records, none appears for the respondents in spite of notice.

3. In terms of HSN Explanatory Notes 'Geraniol' would be classifiable under Heading 3302 provided it contains 50% to 70% of 'Geraniol' alongwith varying amounts of citronellol and nerol and that the substance must be in admixture with some other substance. The chemical examiner does not describe the sample as a mixture but only opines that "the sample is in the form of yellow coloured liquid having aroma. It has the characteristics of geraniol - an organic chemical." Therefore, classification of the product in dispute under Heading 33.02 is ruled out. It is rightly classifiable under Chapter Heading 29.05 in the light of HSN Sub-Notes which describe geraniol as an Acyclic alcohol being an unsaturated monohydric alcohol..

4. In the light of the above, no interference with the impugned order is called for and we accordingly uphold the same and reject the appeal.

Same Court & Year Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumb... Same Parties Commissioner of C. Ex. vs Eastern Aromatic Pvt. Ltd. Same Subject Education Same Judge J Balasundaram, Vice-, V T M.