2005(09)LCX0227

IN THE CESTAT, WEST ZONAL BENCH, MUMBAI [COURT NO. I]

Ms. Jyoti Balasundaram, Vice-President and Dr. T.V. Sairam, Member (T)

Whirlpool of India Ltd.

Versus

Commissioner of Customs, Mumbai

Order No. A/426/2005-WZB/C-I (C.S.T.B.), dated 22-9-2005 in Appeal No. C/796/99

Advocated By -

None, for the Appellant.
Shri Manoj Krishna, DR, for the Respondent.

[Order per : Jyoti Balasundaram, Vice-President]. -

This is an appeal against the order of the Commissioner of Customs (Appeals), who has held that Deodoriser LTC Catalyst imported by the appellants herein, seeking clearance under chapter heading 3815.19 of the Customs Tariff Act as catalyst is not a catalysts but deodorizer falling under heading 6815.99.


2. None appears for the appellants in spite of notice. Hence we heard the ld. DR and perused the records. The Commissioner (Appeals) found that from the sample and the function of the goods as explained in the literature of the goods that they are Deodorizer. The appellants themselves stated the goods are used in refrigerator for removal of foul smell in the air for re-circulation. According to the Commissioner (Appeals), the function of the catalyst is only of limited nature and the goods are found to be Deodorizer. The fact is that there is a catalyst function is not sufficient to hold that the goods are catalyst. In Appeal Memorandum, the appellants having referred to the definition of catalyst and have contended that since the goods in question are being used as catalyst to remove the odour by catalytic reaction process, chapter-heading 3815.19 is appropriate heading under which goods are to be classified. However, on perusal of the literature filed before us, we find that the goods are cleared as Deodorizer although working on principle of catalyst. Therefore, the classification arrived at by the authorities below is required to be upheld. Thus, we uphold the impugned order and reject the appeal.

Equivalent 2006 (196) ELT 0197 (Tri. - Mumbai)