Burden to prove classification is on Department :

(i) Under normal circumstances, it is the responsibility of the Department to establish the correct Tariff Heading under which the product falls. The onus is on the Department to establish the alternate classification, when the Department turns down the one claimed by the assessee.

(ii) When certain goods are prima facie covered by the generic description, the burden to prove that they are not so covered would be on the person claiming so.

(iii) To sum up, the burden to prove a particular classification is initially on the Department and once it is discharged, the onus shifts to the assessee, because it is he who has exclusive and special knowledge about the product produced by him.

Relevant case laws

1. Kirloskar Oil Engines Ltd. v. Union of India (1991) (51) ELT 334

It is well settled that the burden to establish that certain goods can be classified and excise duty can be levied under a particular tariff item is entirely on the Department.

2. Union of India v. Sahney Steel And Press Works Ltd. (1992) (58) ELT 38

It was held by the Tribunal that the burden was on the authorities to establish that particular goods fell within a particular item of the Tariff.

3. H.P.L. Chemicals v. CCE, Chandigarh, 2006 (197) ELT 324 (SC)

If the Department intends to classify the goods under a particular heading or sub-heading different from that claimed by assessee, the Department has to adduce proper evidence and discharge burden of proof.

4. Hindustan Ferodo Ltd. v. CCE 1997 (89) E.L.T. 16 (SC)

The burden of proving that a particular goods fall in a particular entry will be on the Department.