TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
1997 (2) TMI 233
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....or the Respondents. [Order per : S.L. Peeran, Member (J)]. - This appeal arises from the Order-in-Appeal dated 2-12-1988, rejecting the claim of the appellants for classifying the imported items described in the Bill of Entry and Invoice as 'Parts of Heat Exchangers' under Heading 84.17(1) of the erstwhile Tariff and also the benefit of exemption under Notification No. 35/79-Cus. The imported i....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....at list was forwarded by that office to the appellants. He has observed that it is not known as to when exactly the said certificate was issued by the DGTD, and further observed that the recommendation given by DGTD was for benefit of Notification No. 179-Cus. which Notification had been issued on 4-9-1980 in supersession of Notification No. 35/79-Cus. and the same was finally signed by the prescr....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....arned Representative submitted that they have now produced an affidavit of one Shri Shivdas Niloba Naik, Jt. General Manager (Imports), who has stated that the items then imported had undergone complete forged process in the suppliers factory and that no further process was carried out in the factory and that they were imported in complete finished condition and that they were used in R.G.Boiler o....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....he item is alloy steel forgings. The appellants have produced drawing to contend that these are correlatable, however, this has not been accepted by the lower authorities. The appellants have now produced an affidavit of one Shri Shivdas Niloba Naik, Jt. General Manager (Imports), who states that the item was a complete part and used in R.G.Boiler of Chemical Machinery. The appellants in the appea....