MILLIPORE INDIA (P) LTD. Vs. CCE
LAWS(CB)-2000-12-2
CUSTOMS, EXCISE AND SERVICE TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL BANGALORE
Decided on December 01,2000

Millipore India (P) Ltd. Appellant
VERSUS
CCE Respondents

JUDGEMENT

S.S.SEKHON - (1.)THESE two appeals are filed by the importers of Millipore (India) Ltd., who had imported certain items which were in prescribed lengths in one case and running length in another, but were claimed by the appellants to be classifiable under Customs Tariff Heading 84.21 as they were specifically designed filter elements though made up of plastics. The Proper Officer of Customs who was required to assess the Bill of Entry ordered a 'provisional assessment' since he had certain reservations about the valuation of the product and ordered payment of duty under Customs Tariff heading 39.20 vide his provisional assessment approved on the Bill of Entry. The appellants, importers, executed the requisite bond for provisional assessment.
(2.)The appellants were dissatisfied with the provisional assessment order classifying the goods under 39.20 and preferred a refund application under Section 27 of the Customs Act, 1962 by claiming note 10 to Chapter 39 prescribes that plate sheets, films, foils and strips of plastics etc., would only be included under 39.20 and relying on Chapter XVI notes and Chapter 84 notes, they claimed the subject goods which were specifically designed filter made of a meshwork of cellulose acetate or nitrate and with a defined pore size, dependent on the extent of cross -linking, e.g., Millipore filters. Small pore sizes that filter bacteria are used for sterilizing solutions for e.g. cell culture of nucleopore filter and would be classified under 84.21 of Customs Tariff.
The Asst. Collector rejected the refund applications for determining the duties at the rates prescribed under 84.21 holding the classification under 39.20 to be correct and also in one case held the application for refund to be barred by limitation under Section 27 of the Customs Act, 1962.

(3.)THE Collector (Appeals) passed a common order in the two refund applications, thus rejected by AC. He did not give any finding as regards the bar of time limitation. He rejected the plea of the appellants as regards the classification under 84.21 and confirmed the classification under 39.20 and the appellants are in appeal before us against this common order of the Commissioner (Appeals).


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.