https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=83387 Non-supply of a formal chemical test report did not amount to denial of natural justice where the test result was communicated and could be contested. A private laboratory report was not binding on the Department because the sample was not drawn in the presence of Central Excise and therefore lacked proper authorisation for dispute resolution. The demand was held within limitation because the classification remained provisional under Rule 9B, and the incorrect fibre-composition declaration was treated as a misstatement made with intent to evade duty. The duty demand was sustained and the assessee's challenge failed on all substantive grounds. en-us Fri, 15 Jul 1994 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 13 Jul 2011 11:45:59 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=83387 Non-supply of a formal chemical test report did not amount to denial of natural justice where the test result was communicated and could be contested. A private laboratory report was not binding on the Department because the sample was not drawn in the presence of Central Excise and therefore lacked proper authorisation for dispute resolution. The demand was held within limitation because the classification remained provisional under Rule 9B, and the incorrect fibre-composition declaration was treated as a misstatement made with intent to evade duty. The duty demand was sustained and the assessee's challenge failed on all substantive grounds. Case-Laws Central Excise Fri, 15 Jul 1994 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=83387