ORDER
G. Sankaran, Member (T)
1. The captioned appeal was initially filed as a Revision Application before the Central Government, which under Section 131-B (2) of the Customs Act, 1962, has come as transferred proceedings to this Tribunal for disposal as if it were an appeal filed before it.
2. The appellant imported a consignment of what was invoiced as “high grade manganese dioxide” with 83-85% MnO2 content. The appellant, claimed assessment of the goods under item No. 26 of the 1934 Customs Tariff Schedule (ICT) (“Metallic ores all sorts except ores and other pigment ores, and antimony ore”) which was rejected by the lower authorities who upheld the original assessment under item No 28 ICT (“Chemicals, Drugs and Medicines, all sorts, not otherwise specified”).
3. The imported MnO2 is admittedly of battery grade. The appellant’s contention is that the manganese ore has not been chemically processed but subjected only to the process of crushing, washing and separation of extraneous matter. A reduction in the particle size obtained by such type of processing does not change the character of the ore.
4. Shri Kumar, on behalf of the appellant, contended that the relevant ITC Policy treated Battery grade MnO2 on the same footing as manganese ore. The Customs Tariff Schedule of 1975, currently in force, classifies battery grade MnO2 as a mineral product and not as a chemical. For the rest, he reiterated the written submissions.
5. Shri Sunder Rajan, on behalf of the Respondent, submitted that the question whether the goods imported were merely ore or whether they had been processed to a degree such that it could no longer be described to be mere ore was a question of fact. In this connection he quoted from McGraw-Hill Encyclopaedia of Science & Technology (Volume 8, p. 107) to show that ores suitable for metallurgical purposes contain more than 40% manganese. The typical percentage analysis of a high-grade ore is given as 62.4 MnO2. The Deptl. Representative also referred to CCCN Explanatory Notes under Chapter 26 (Metallic Ores, Slag and Ash) whereby Ores which have been submitted to processes not normal to the metallurgical industry, are excluded from the Chapter. One of the examples given is pyrolusite (a variety of manganese ores) prepared for use in dry batteries.
6. We have considered the submissions of both sides. From the avail able material, it is seen that the goods imported were high-grade manganese dioxide (battery grade) with 83% to 85% MnO2. The normal MnO2 content of ores used for metallurgical purposes is 40% to around 63%. Apparently, the ore which was mined from- the earth had undergone some degree of processing to enrich the MnO2 content to make it suitable for battery application. The fact that the Import Trade Control Policy treats battery grade manganese dioxide on the same basis as manganese ore is not relevant foe the purpose of classification under the Customs Tariff. In this connection, we may usefully refer to the meaning of the expression “Metallic Ores” as given in Chapter Note 2 to Chapter 20 of the 1975 Customs Tariff Schedule (since the expression has not been defined in the 1934 Customs Tariff, we are perforce required to turn to other authoritative works and one such work could be the current Customs Tariff Schedule). The expression means minerals of mineralogical species actually used in the metallurgical industry of mercury, of the fissile or radioactive metals of Chapter 28 or of the metals of Sections 14 or 15 even if they are intended for non-metallurgical purposes. The heading does not, however, include minerals which have been submitted to processing not normal to the metallurgical industry. As the DR has pointed out, manganese ore specially prepared for battery application is not considered as ore vide CCCN Explanatory Notes (Volume I, Chapter 26, page 187). The Condensed Chemical Dictionary by Hawley (Tenth Edition at page 761) describes “Ore” as an aggregate of valuable minerals and gangue from which one or more metals can be extracted at a profit. From all these and the invoice description as high grade manganese dioxide, it is clear that the goods imported were not metallurgical ore as such, but ore processed to a degree that it ceases to be mere metallurgical [ore used for extraction of metals. In the circumstances and in the absence of any evidence adduced by the appellants in support of their contentions we have to hold that the assessment made by the lower authorities was correct.
7. The appeal is rejected.