Judgements

C. Natwarlal And Co. vs Commissioner Of Customs on 5 April, 2005

Customs, Excise and Gold Tribunal – Mumbai
C. Natwarlal And Co. vs Commissioner Of Customs on 5 April, 2005
Equivalent citations: 2005 (186) ELT 284 Tri Mumbai
Bench: S T S.S., T Anjaneyulu


ORDER

S.S. Sekhon, Member (T)

1. The appellants have imported certain items which are called as ‘C Tanble Tents (Laminaria Tents)’. There is a dispute on the classification of the imported goods, the appellant is claiming classification under Heading 99.04 as contraceptive, while Revenue issues a Show Cause Notice and proposes demands, proposing to classify it under Heading 3006.10 vide demand notice dated 26.10.1998 much after clearance of goods classified under Heading 99.04. However, on 29.12.1999, a corrigendum was issued proposing to reclassify the goods under Heading 1212.99 and not 3006.10 as proposed in Notice dated 26.10.98, after it was contested by the importer by a reply to that notice that their goods were not sterilsed and were therefore not in the nature of medicaments and excluded from Chapter 30.

2. From the catalogue of produced, it is apparent that these items are used as a hygroscopic cervical dilator which could be used wherever cervical dilation or softening of the cervix is desired. Same examples are:

(i) Cervical stenosis related to dysmenorrhea – possible cause of infertility resulting from cauterization or conization.

(ii) Placement and removal of intrauterine devices.

(iii) Radium placement.

(iv) Drainage of uterine cavity.

None of the above examples indicate the use of these goods as a contraceptive. Therefore their classification cannot be arrived at under Heading 99.04 as pleaded by the impoters.

3. Considering the Chapter Notes of the HSN, it is found that such Laminaria Sea-Tangle would be falling under Heading 3006.10, if sterile. The present non sterile goods would be appropriately classifiable under Heading 1212.99 of the Customs Tariff. In view of the same and the proposed amendment to the Show Cause Notice dated 29.12.1998, we would consider demands being within the normal period of six months only with effect from 29.12.1998 under 1212.90 could be upheld and the matter is required to be remitted to work out the demands accordingly.

4. Appeal accordingly partially allowed as remand to Deputy Commissioner to rework the duty under Heading 1212.90.

(Pronounce in Court)