Just a moment...

Top
FeedbackReport
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Feedback/Report an Error
Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
TMI Blog
Home / RSS

1997 (8) TMI 266

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ngs and sub-headings as below :   Copper and Articles there of No. (Chapter -74)   Heading No. Sub-heading   A.CASTINGOT   74.01 7401.00   B. CASTROD   74.03 7403.00   (i) of Brass (Zinc Content 5% and above)         (ii) Other than brass (i.e. Gun Metal Phos-Bronze, Aluminium Bronze, Cadmium Copper etc.) having Copper Content 85% or more by weight. 74.03 74.03 7403.19   Cast & Proof Machined.         (iii) Castings not otherwise specified,         C. Viz. Cast Rod (unwro-ught) Plate, Bush, etc. not worked upon subsequently.   74.10 7410.00 1.2 The Assistant Collector modified classification in res....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....he meaning assigned to it. Asstt. Collector's order has not justified its classification under Heading No. 74.03 sub-heading No. 7403.19 in details and to that extent it is not in order. This, therefore, calls for re-examination with reference to any processing undertaken for the purpose of proper classification". 1.3 At this stage, learned JDR, however, points out that the Revenue contests that these observations do not pertain to Item B(ii) i.e. cast copper rods other than brass. In their view, this could never be an issue before the Collector (Appeals) inasmuch as the tariff heading for this item was never modified by the Assistant Collector in the Order-in-Original and, therefore, there could be no grievance of the respondent here....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....asis of the aforesaid inspection report, the Assistant Collector classified the product declared at B(i) as mentioned above in the classification list but did not classify the product B(ii) which was the subject matter of dispute and as directed by the Collector (Appeals) was required to be classified in de novo proceedings. The respondent herein thereafter again filed an appeal against the de novo order dated 12-6-1987 (16-6-1987). The Collector (Appeals) accepting the plea of the respondent and on the basis of the manufacturing process set out by the Assistant Collector classified the product "cast copper rods other than brass as described under Item B(ii)" as falling under sub-heading 7410.00 i.e. as unwrought cast copper rods. This is a....