2005 (2) TMI 597

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... Appellant. Ms. Monika Kapoor, Advocate, for the Respondent. [Order per : P.S. Bajaj, Member (J)]. -  In the above captioned appeals, the issue involved is common and as such, are being disposed of by this common order. The controversy in these appeals relates to the classification of Acid Resistant Clay bricks manufactured by the respondents. The learned Commissioner (Appeals) had c....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....t the rate of 15% ad valorem. The impugned orders in all the appeals deserve to be set aside and the orders-in-original which are in favour of the Revenue, deserve to be restored. 3. On the other hand, the learned Counsel has reiterated the correctness of the impugned order and referred to the various reports of the Chemical Examiner who conducted the test of the bricks in question and als....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....he properties contained therein. The respondents, before the Commissioner (Appeals), as we find from the record, had produced (i) certificate of Central Glass and Ceramic Research Institute, Khurja giving analysis of samples of both unfired and finally manufactured Acid Resistant Clay bricks, (ii) CGCRI's Test certificates dated 29-10-1998, 10-11-1998, 13-11-1998, 5-3-2001 and 7-3-2001/23-3-2001 i....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....mode and process of manufacture, characteristics and percentages of the raw materials used i.e. siliceous earths, alumina, etc. and the end use, the Commissioner (Appeals) has rightly/correctly arrived at the conclusion that the acid resistant clay bricks produced by the respondents could not be classified as fire clay bricks under Chapter heading 6902 of the CETA. This conclusion also finds corro....