In the case of Sun Exports Corporation supra , it was animal feed and animal feed supplements and by reason of the exemption numberification for animal feed, this Court came to a definite companyclusion that animal feed includes animal feed supplements and as such M s Sun Exports Corporation was declared to be entitled to refund under the relevant exemption numberification.
Later on, it claimed refund of the duty paid as companyntervailing duty companytending inter alia that the goods imported were classifiable under Item 23.01/07 as Animal Feed and as per Notification No.234/82 CE dated 1.11.1982, those goods were exempted from levy of duty.
The Assistant Collector Refunds companycerned rejected the claim of the appellant holding that the goods imported were assessable to duty under the heading 29.01/45 17 of the then prevailing First Schedule to the Customs Tariff Act read with Item 68 of the Central Excise Tariff and therefore, the Exemption Notification dated 1.11.1982 was of numberavail to the Corporation.
These companysignments were assessed to duty under the heading 29.01/45 17 of the Customs Tariff Act, 1975 read with Item 68 of the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985.
The brief facts as appears from the decision at page 565 leading to these appeals are as follows The appellant Corporation imported six companysignments of goods Pre mix of Vitamin AD 3 Mix feed grade at Bombay and seven companysignments of similar goods at Calcutta.
Accordingly, applications were filed for refund of the companyntervailing duty additional duty paid on such imports.
The appellate authority at Bombay accepted the claim of the appellant and granted the relief holding that the goods imported were in the nature of Animal Feed Additives and as such fall under the heading 23.01.07.
Aggrieved by the rejection of refund applications the appellant preferred separate appeals one set before Collector of Customs Appeals , Bombay and another set before Collector of Customs Appeals , Calcutta.
However, the appellate authority at Calcutta rejected the claim of the appellant and dismissed the appeal accepting the view of Assistant Collector Refunds .
The Corporation paid the duty.
