1996 (7) TMI 383

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....for the Respondent. [Order per : Shiben K. Dhar, Member (T)]. - These two appeals arising out of common order in Appeal No. 531/88 BCH, dated 21-1-1988 were heard together and are being disposed of by this common order. C/916/88-B 2. The appellants imported Tin-plated caps vide Bill of Entry 2594, dated 22-7-1983. These were assessed under Heading 73.33/40 of Customs Tariff Act, 1....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....nd this has not been contested at any stage. There is no application made for including this ground. Apart from this since end-use certificate was not produced the refund claim has been correctly rejected. 4. We have heard both sides. It is seen that goods were assessed to duty under Tariff Item No. 73.33/40 CTA 1975. Admittedly classification was not subject matter of claim either before ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... for making the additional claim has not been filed. We also note that no end-use certificate has been filed nor any evidence has been placed before us regarding affidavit which is claimed to have been filed before the Customs and apprehended to have been detached from the main papers. In view of this we do not find any merit in the appeal. We therefore reject the appeal No. C/916/88-B and uphold ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ed caps. Collector (Appeals) seems to have confined his attention only to Tin-plated caps. It was contended before us that in addition to Tin-plated caps they had also imported lacquers. It is therefore obvious that no findings have been recorded on the contents of the other consignment imported i.e. lacquer. We therefore set aside this part of the impugned order which does not contain any finding....