ORDER
P.G. Chacko, Member (J)
1. In this appeal filed by the Revenue, the issue before us is as to whether the product namely 3, 5-dinitro-ortho-tolumide (D.O.T.) is classifiable under Chapter sub-heading No. 2302.00 or under Chapter sub-heading No. 2942.00 of the Central Excise Tariff.
2. The Asstt. Collector in his order held that the product is an. organic chemical classifiable under Chapter sub-heading No. 2942.00 and not a preparation of a kind used in animal feeding as described under Chapter sub-heading No. 2302.00. In the assessee’s appeal against this or-der-in-original, the Collector of Central Excise (Appeals) reversed the findings and held that the product was classifiable under Chapter Heading No. 2302.00.
3. We have heard Shri R.S. Sangia, JDR for the Revenue. None is present for the respondents though notice of hearing has been duly served on them as evidenced by the records on the file. Since sufficient opportunity has been afforded to the respondents for hearing in this appeal, we proceed to dispose of this appeal after hearing the ld. JDR.
4. The ld. JDR submits that the product namely 3, 5-dinitro-ortho-tolumide (D.O.T.) is an organic chemical manufactured by a synthetic process involving raw materials namely Nitric Acid, Sulphuric Acid, Orthoxylene, Thionyl Chloride, Sodium Nitrate and an organic chemical. He also invites our attention to the process of manufacture of the product, which is diagramatically shown at page 93 of the records. We find that the starting material for the synthesis of the product D.O.T. is Orthoxylene, which is eventually converted to the product in question. The ld. JDR further submits that the term ‘preparation’ used under Chapter sub-heading No. 2302.00 signifies an admixture of various nutrients including vitamins for use as animal feed and that the term cannot mean a pure organic chemical, which is by no means an admixture. He further draws our attention to the HSN Explanatory Notes on Chapter 23, whereunder the Heading is shown to exclude products of Chapter 29, which are organic chemicals. The ld. JDR also invites our attention to a decision of Larger Bench of this Tribunal in the case of Tetragon Chemie (P) Ltd. and Ors. v. C.C.E., Bangalore -1999 (30) RLT 366 and seeks to distinguish the same with reference to the facts of the present appeal.
5. We have carefully considered the submissions of the ld. JDR and the records of the case, particularly the Order-in-Original and the impugned Order-in-Appeal. We have also perused the Larger Bench decision vide Supra. We find that the Collector (Appeals) has not applied his mind to the vital materials and factors, which distinguish the Chapter sub-headings 2302.00 and 2942.00 with reference to the product in question. On the other hand, we find that the adjudicating authority has dealt at length with these aspects and has come to a correct finding that the product in question is an item classifiable as other organic chemicals falling under Chapter sub-heading No. 2942.00. We also find that the Larger Bench decision aforesaid is to the effect that a preparation consisting of one or more vitamins mixed with diluents etc. is classifiable as animal feed under Heading No. 2302 of the Central Excise Tariff Act and not under Heading No. 2936 in view of HSN Explanatory Notes.
6. On application of the ratio of this decision, we have no doubt that the product under referenceln the present appeal can hardly be a preparation classifiable under Chapter sub-heading No. 2302.00 of the Central Excise Tariff and shall appropriately be classified under Chapter sub-heading No. 2942.00 for the reasons rightly put forward by the ld. JDR.
7. Accordingly, we set aside the impugned order and allow the appeal of the Revenue. Ordered accordingly.