https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=80187 Asbestos raw described and understood as a distinct commodity could not be classified as asbestos fibre under Tariff Item 22F absent clear statutory coverage. The Tribunal relied on technical material distinguishing crude asbestos from fibre, noted the department had produced no evidence that asbestos cement products could be made only with fibre, and distinguished the authorities cited by the Revenue as dealing with fibre or manufacturing process rather than asbestos raw. Because the excise tariff entry did not cover asbestos raw, additional duty of customs under Section 3 of the Customs Tariff Act was not leviable on that basis; the appeal succeeded and consequential relief followed. en-us Mon, 23 Oct 1989 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 15 Jun 2011 12:43:06 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=80187 Asbestos raw described and understood as a distinct commodity could not be classified as asbestos fibre under Tariff Item 22F absent clear statutory coverage. The Tribunal relied on technical material distinguishing crude asbestos from fibre, noted the department had produced no evidence that asbestos cement products could be made only with fibre, and distinguished the authorities cited by the Revenue as dealing with fibre or manufacturing process rather than asbestos raw. Because the excise tariff entry did not cover asbestos raw, additional duty of customs under Section 3 of the Customs Tariff Act was not leviable on that basis; the appeal succeeded and consequential relief followed. Case-Laws Central Excise Mon, 23 Oct 1989 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=80187