2012 (8) TMI 628

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... Shri S. Chakraborty, Asstt. Commissioner (A.R.) for the Department   Per Shri S. K. Gaule :   Heard both sides. The appellant filed this appeal against the Order-in-Appeal No.059/Kol-VI/2003 dated 24.09.2003, whereby the ld. Commissioner (Appeals) has upheld the order of the lower adjudicating authority rejecting the claim of classification of the appellants. 2. Briefly stated ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....Commissioner (Appeals). The ld. Commissioner (Appeals) dismissed their appeal on the ground that the appellants have not followed the correct procedure at the time of drawal of samples of the goods for test. Hence the appeal. 3. The contention of the appellants is that the period involved in this case is from March, 1994 to September, 1994. The contention is that the case has been decided again....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....a, General Manager of the Appellant Company. They have also produced the classification list of the same goods at their Chennai Unit, wherein the goods have been classified under Chapter 2710.60. 4. The ld. A.R. appearing for the Department reiterated the findings of the ld. Commissioner (Appeals). 5. We have considered the submissions and perused the records. We find that the issue relates ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ional Test House, an Affidavit filed by Mr. Sharma, have not been taken into consideration while deciding the case of the appellants. In these circumstances, the case is remanded to the lower adjudicating authority to decide the issue afresh after taking into consideration all the submissions and the evidences produced by the appellants. Both the sides are at liberty to produce all the documents i....