1996 (9) TMI 255

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....f the case are that the respondents herein are engaged in the manufacture of products described by them as Naphthol AS, Naphthol ASBS and Naphthol ASG. The respondents filed classification list and claimed assessment of these products under sub-heading 2903.10. The Asstt. Collector approved the classification list classifying the products under 3204.29. The respondents herein being aggrieved by this order of the ld. Asstt. Collector, filed an appeal before the Collector (Appeals). The Collector (Appeals) set aside the order of the Asstt. Collector and remanded the case to the A.C. for consideration afresh after observing the principles of natural justice. It was represented by the respondents herein that the goods in question were not colou....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....i J.M. Sharma, the learned DR appearing for the appellants submits that the learned Collector (Appeals) relied on the respondents contention that their case was covered by the clarification given by the Board in their letter dated 25-2-1986; that the ld. Collector (Appeals) did not take into consideration the test report on the samples drawn as also on Note 2 of Chapter 32. He submitted that Chapter Note 2 of Chapter 32 as also the chemical test report on the samples clearly showed that the products described as Naphthol AS, Naphthol ASBS and Naphthol ASG were not actually naphthol and therefore, were not covered by the clarification given by the Board in their letter dated 25-2-1986. He therefore, submitted that the Asstt. Collector held t....