1984 (12) TMI 71

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ecified in the notice be not approved. 2.  A show cause notice was issued and replies have been filed. A» a, very short point is involved, we issue Rule D.B. and proceed to decide the petition. 3.  The petitioner had filed classification lists before two separate Assistant Collectors of Central Excise. The items of Railway Track Material in dispute. Tie Bars, Cottors and Two Way Key? and Steel Loose Jaws were the subject matter of an order passed by the Appellate Collector of Central Excise, New Delhi on 20th July, 1983. This order shows that the dispute was whether these items had to be included in tariff item 26AA or under item 68. The Assistant Collector had held that the Tie Bars and Cottors fall under tariff items 68 a....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....or the respondent and also stated in the affidavit in reply that the approval was given provisionally by the Assistant Collector, Central Excise, MOD-IV. We think that this position is not tenable. The approval had already been given by the Assistant Collector, MOD-11 and it was not stated therein that this was provisional. It may be mentioned here also that a provisional assessment is done under Rule 9B which is a different procedure from an approval under Rule 173B. According to Rule 173B, the assessee has to file for approval before the proper officer, a list contained in a particular form in accordance with the rule, and that officer may make enquiry and then approve the list. All this has been done earlier by one Assistant Collector an....