Just a moment...
Convert scanned orders, printed notices, PDFs and images into clean, searchable, editable text within seconds. Starting at 2 Credits/page
Try Now →Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether the forged products manufactured by the appellants were classifiable under Heading 7326.90 or under Heading 8483.00, and whether the impugned demand and penalty could survive.
Analysis: The Tribunal followed its earlier decision in the appellants' own case and accepted the classification claimed by the appellants. It found the Revenue's view on classification unsustainable and, on that basis, held that the exemption consequence flowing from Notification No. 223/88-C.E. dated 23-6-1988 could not be denied on the footing adopted in the impugned order.
Conclusion: The goods were held to be classifiable as claimed by the appellants, and the demand and penalty were set aside in favour of the assessee.