2016 (10) TMI 36

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... Ms. Rinky Arora, Advocate for the appellant. Sh. G.R. Singh, DR for the respondent. ORDER These three appeals are on the same issue of classification certain items manufactured by the appellants and hence are taken up together for disposal. 2. Appellants are engaged in the manufacture of various engineering goods liable to excise duty under Chapter 84 and 85 of Central Excise Tarif....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....th the sides and perused appeal records. The correct classification of impugned goods are in dispute. Both the lower authorities recorded that the classification was decided based on the description of the products in question. The appellant did not submit any material, catalogue, literature and description to clarify and support their claim for classification under CTH 8474. Their contention all ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ed to furnish even basic product literature to support their claim. When they are before us on second appeal, still they stood on the assertion of revenue's burden to establish a particular classification. We note that the appellant's attitude is rather strange and did not help in finding the facts relevant to the dispute. 5. In any case, we have proceeded to examine the case in hand wi....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....hines for forming foundry moulds of sand." 6. Heading 8431 deals with parts suitable for use solely or principally with the machinery or Heading No.84.25 to 84.30. Heading 84.29 specifically includes "scrapers" and Heading 84.28 specifically includes "conveyers". We have examined the description of the products, which is as per the appellant's own documents. The descriptions are reproduced ....