https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=50091 Exemption under Notification No. 275/88-C.E. was considered unavailable for railway inserts, OHE fittings and electrical transmission caps because the goods, after removal from moulds, underwent operations such as annealing, fettling, grinding, shot blasting, hydraulic pressing and galvanisation, so they were not treated as unmachined cast articles at clearance. Railway inserts were regarded as cast articles of iron or steel under Heading 73.25 rather than railway track construction material under Heading 73.02, although that classification did not secure exemption. The commentary also notes that suppression and wilful misstatement were treated as established for extended limitation, while the confiscation fine was viewed as excessive and the penalty as requiring reduction. en-us Wed, 06 Dec 2000 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 19 Aug 2010 16:55:57 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=50091 Exemption under Notification No. 275/88-C.E. was considered unavailable for railway inserts, OHE fittings and electrical transmission caps because the goods, after removal from moulds, underwent operations such as annealing, fettling, grinding, shot blasting, hydraulic pressing and galvanisation, so they were not treated as unmachined cast articles at clearance. Railway inserts were regarded as cast articles of iron or steel under Heading 73.25 rather than railway track construction material under Heading 73.02, although that classification did not secure exemption. The commentary also notes that suppression and wilful misstatement were treated as established for extended limitation, while the confiscation fine was viewed as excessive and the penalty as requiring reduction. Case-Laws Central Excise Wed, 06 Dec 2000 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=50091