https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=167126 The court dismissed the writ petition, emphasizing that the petitioners should have pursued the alternative remedy of filing an appeal with the Collector (Appeals) Central Excise. It was held that the Assistant Collector had jurisdiction to classify the yarn under Tariff Item 18(III)(ii), and the provisional assessment and subsequent order were deemed valid. The court clarified that classification should be based on the fibre content of the yarn, not the initial raw material. The petition was dismissed without costs, and the security amount was to be returned to the petitioners. en-us Sat, 24 Nov 1984 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 06 Dec 2014 15:28:36 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=167126 The court dismissed the writ petition, emphasizing that the petitioners should have pursued the alternative remedy of filing an appeal with the Collector (Appeals) Central Excise. It was held that the Assistant Collector had jurisdiction to classify the yarn under Tariff Item 18(III)(ii), and the provisional assessment and subsequent order were deemed valid. The court clarified that classification should be based on the fibre content of the yarn, not the initial raw material. The petition was dismissed without costs, and the security amount was to be returned to the petitioners. Case-Laws Central Excise Sat, 24 Nov 1984 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=167126