Classification dispute remanded after technical evidence and hearing concerns required fresh adjudication of glass products.

A classification dispute over glass stems and sintered glass rods was remanded because the assessee contended that relevant technical literature had not been considered and that an effective hearing had not been granted. The appellate authority treated these procedural and evidentiary concerns as sufficient to warrant re-examination, and the matter was sent back for fresh adjudication. The assessee was given liberty to produce evidence in support of its classification claim before the jurisdictional Assistant Commissioner.

---

---

Issues: Whether the classification dispute concerning glass stems and sintered glass rods required reconsideration in view of the assessee's claim that relevant technical literature was not considered and an effective opportunity of hearing was not granted.

Analysis: The appeal did not result in a final finding on classification. The assessee asserted that technical material produced before the appellate authority had not been taken into account and that proper hearing had not been afforded. In these circumstances, the matter was found fit for re-examination by the adjudicating authority, with liberty to the party to adduce evidence in support of its claim.

Outcome: The matter was remanded to the jurisdictional Assistant Commissioner for fresh adjudication after granting an opportunity to the party.

---