TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2016 (1) TMI 204
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....chemicals, fuel additives, fire side chemicals, resins etc. On the basis of some intelligence that the main appellant evaded Central Excise duty by wrongly classifying their few products, officers of the DGCEI conducted an investigation and the samples of the products were drawn which were sent to the Deputy Chief Chemist, Mumbai for chemical analysis. The said samples were drawn on 19th September and 17th October, 1997. Further investigation was carried out and various statements of the responsible persons were recorded. On completion of the investigation and receipt of the analytical report from the Deputy Chief Chemist, the authorities came to a conclusion that the appellant had mis-declared their final products classifying the same unde....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... is his submission that during the period in question no samples were drawn nor any objection was raised by the department and the classification lists were approved finally which were followed for discharging the duty liability. He would submit that the samples drawn in 1997 would be applicable only for a period of six months from the date of issuance of show-cause notice for the demand of duty. He would submit that appellant had given all the manufacturing process and the end-use of the products to the department when they filed the classification lists. Post 1995, when the system of filing classification list was discontinued and filing of declaration was brought into statute they did so by giving cross reference of the earlier approved ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....and in the case in hand, the Chief Chemist's report has not contested by the main appellant. 5. We have considered the submissions made at length by both sides. 6. On perusal of the records, we find that the issue involved is regarding the classification of few products of the appellant which they claim under Chapter 29 while it is the case of the Revenue that these products merit classification under Chapter 39. The main appellant has also proposed that the demand is hit by limitation. 6.1 Instead of going into the merits of the case and classification of the products, as correctly stated by the Learned Counsel that it may be of academic interest, we take up the appeal for disposal on the question of limitation. 6.2 We find that the pe....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....t any clarifications or details and not submitted by the appellant. Adverse of inference can be drawn against department from the fact that the said classification lists were approved finally, would mean that the appellant had submitted all the relevant information required for the approval of classification list of the products manufactured by them. In the absence of any evidence indicating otherwise, the findings recorded by the first appellate authority that the appellant had not given various raw material composition, chemical composition etc. seems to be presumptive and without any basis. 6.3 In our considered view during the period from April 1993 to June 1995 classification lists being approved by the Revenue authorities, it cannot ....