1997 (12) TMI 352

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....nt.  Shri R.K. Ghadge, Customs & Excise Consultant, for the Respondent. [Order per : K.S. Venkataramani, Member (T)]. -  The Commissioner of Central Excise, Mumbai-III has filed this appeal against the Order dated 22-4-1992 passed by the Commissioner of Customs and Central Excise (Appeals), Mumbai. The respondents are processors of cotton fabrics and man-made fabrics falling und....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ssioner held that the goods were classifiable under Heading 52.06. The Respondents requested for a re-test of the sample which was accordingly done. The Chief Chemist on request gave the test report in which the cotton percentage was 68.3 and synthetic filament yarn (polyester) 31.7. The jurisdictional Asstt. Collector passed his order dated 1-4-1991 based on the re-test report and approved the cl....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ve been drawn. It was therefore held by the Commissioner (Appeals) that following the Tribunal decision, the differential duty can be collected only for the lot No. 32 and not other lots from which no sample was tested by the Department. 3. The ld. SDR Shri V.K. Puri contended that the Respondents had never declared other lot numbers in their classification list and all these fabrics under....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....he customer who supplied the fabric. In such situation it will be reasonable for the Department to apply the test results of 1 lot to the fabric covered by the classification list on the peculiar facts of this case. Also relevant is the fact that the Department has taken the stand that it cannot be presumed that the grey fabrics of other lots were of different constituent fibres when they have bee....