https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=83082 Imported goods were examined for classification as wool yarn or wool waste, with the dispute turning on whether the department had proved misdeclaration. The department failed to support a wool yarn classification by chemical test, expert examination, or trade evidence, while the adjudicating authority itself noted that the goods were irregular in length and not shown to be usable only for weaving. Mere presence of spools was held insufficient to establish classification in the absence of corroborative evidence. On the stated facts, confiscation and penalty were not sustainable. en-us Thu, 24 Feb 1994 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 09 Jul 2011 13:31:31 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=83082 Imported goods were examined for classification as wool yarn or wool waste, with the dispute turning on whether the department had proved misdeclaration. The department failed to support a wool yarn classification by chemical test, expert examination, or trade evidence, while the adjudicating authority itself noted that the goods were irregular in length and not shown to be usable only for weaving. Mere presence of spools was held insufficient to establish classification in the absence of corroborative evidence. On the stated facts, confiscation and penalty were not sustainable. Case-Laws Customs Thu, 24 Feb 1994 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=83082