1996 (12) TMI 207

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... Shri G.D. Sharma, JDR, for the Respondent. [Order per : J.H. Joglekar, Member (T)]. - The appellants were manufacturing yarn falling under Heading 5504. They had declared the composition of such yarn in two classification lists the first being 26/86, dated 26-10-1986 effective from 27-10-1986 and the second classification list was 18/87, dated 29-7-1987 effective from 1-3-1987. The classif....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... duty amounting to Rs. 12,43,152.37 was leviable on the yarn cleared during the period November, 1986 to August, 1987. The Collector after hearing the assessees, confirmed the demand, confiscated the goods but allowed their redemption on payment of a fine of Rs. 1 lakh and also imposed a penalty of Rs. 1 lakh. The present appeal is directed against this order. 3. Shri Kamal Parsurampuria, ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ngly made. Since the assessees had not made any deliberate wrong declaration, there was no warrant for imposition of penalty upon them. 4. Shri G. D. Sharma, JDR arguing for the Revenue maintained that the assessees had mis-represented the facts. He stated that the approval of the classification list was in fact for use of ramie fibre and did not extend when flax fibre was used. On this ar....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....artment had taken cognisance of the fact that the assessees would use either ramie or flax fibre in the composition. When the classification list was accepted with this infirmity, there is no warrant for the Revenue to claim later that the assessees had made a wrong statement with an intent to evade payment of duty. On perusal of the classification lists, and especially the remarks made therein it....