https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=52740 The case focused on the classification of Roller Bearing and Ball Bearing units for duty payment under Notification No. 70/89. The Commissioner (Appeals) determined that the officer in-charge of the warehouse station had the authority to re-open/modify the classification on the Ex-bond B/E, leading to the confirmation of demands for differential duty payment. Ultimately, the goods were correctly classified under Heading 8483.30, and the appeal was allowed, affirming the appropriate classification and duty payment in accordance with the Customs Tariff Act. en-us Thu, 12 Feb 2004 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 07 Oct 2010 15:18:41 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=52740 The case focused on the classification of Roller Bearing and Ball Bearing units for duty payment under Notification No. 70/89. The Commissioner (Appeals) determined that the officer in-charge of the warehouse station had the authority to re-open/modify the classification on the Ex-bond B/E, leading to the confirmation of demands for differential duty payment. Ultimately, the goods were correctly classified under Heading 8483.30, and the appeal was allowed, affirming the appropriate classification and duty payment in accordance with the Customs Tariff Act. Case-Laws Customs Thu, 12 Feb 2004 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=52740