1999 (11) TMI 134

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....Sangia, JDR, for the Respondent. [Order per : G.A. Brahma Deva, Member (J)]. - Arguing for the appellants, Ms. Malini Sud, learned Advocate appearing for the appellant submitted that the dispute is in respect of textured or non-textured yarn. At the first instance the sample was drawn and according to the department the Deniers to the sample is 228.4. On request made by the assessee re-test ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....as it was observed by the Supreme Court in the case of The Government of India, Ministry of Finance, Department of Revenue & Insurance, New Delhi & Others v. Chirala Co-Operative Spinning Mills Ltd., [1980 (6) E.L.T. 174 (A.P.)] in support of his contention. Ms. Malini Sud, ld. Advocate referred the decision of the Tribunal in the case of U.K. Paints Industries v. Collector of Customs, Bombay repo....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....e sample is not forthcoming in the relevant test report. In the circumstances since the method of testing has not been indicated in the test report, the adjudicating authority should have acceded to allow the cross-examination of the Chief Examiner which has not been done in this case. In the facts and circumstances, we are of the view that the matter will have to go back for reconsideration. Acco....