Key Pointers – 

• The appellant, PSL Limited, were denied the exemption on the ground that exemption is available only to the High-density Polyethylene (‘HDPE’) and not for the HDPE compound whereas in the present case the HDPE is compounded with 2% Carbon.
• The issue involved in this case is whether HDPE compounded with 2% carbon black is not eligible for exemption under Serial No. 477 of Notification No. 21/2002-Cus?
• The Tribunal relied on Ratnamani Metal & Tubes Limited vs. CC, Kandla (2013) in which it was held the Revenue has not got even the test certificate from the Government laboratory which was essential in this case. Further, whether the product is a chemically modified HDPE or not and whether it is known as HDPE in the market, has not been considered at all. In the absence of test conducted by the Government controlled laboratory, if the test report of the supplier is relied upon, it has to be fully considered. The Revenue has not applied even the trade parlance test.
• The same has happened in the present case therefore the appeal was allowed.