2026 (2) TMI 614

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ustoms (Appeals-II), Chennai. 2. Heard Shri M. Saravanan, Ld. Chartered Accountant for the Appellants in both the Appeals and Shri Vineet Goyal, Ld. Authorized Representative for the Respondent. 3. In these two Appeals the issues that arise for our consideration are : (i) Whether the demand raised in the impugned order is sustainable or not ? (ii) Whether the demand raised in the SCN is barred by limitation ? and (iii) Whether the First Appellate Authority is correct in imposing a penalty under Section 114A of the Customs Act, 1962 and whether the said Authority is correct in remanding the matter to the limited extent of causing verification as to the eligibility of Appellant to beneficial Notification No.46....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....011 ibid. Hence, at the threshold, we are of the view that these above two directions which have been challenged along with other issues deserve to be set aside which we hereby do. 5. Admittedly, the dispute relates to the classification of "Joss Powder" and from the perusal of the Order-in-Original (supra), the Adjudicating Authority has, without labouring much, resorted to Note 1 (a) to Chapter 44 of Customs Tariff Act, 1975 against which, the Importer-Appellant's case is that the 'Joss Powder' which is a bark of lit-sea tree in powdered form is nothing but a saw dust which do not have perfumery effect of its own and hence, the same could never be used directly or indirectly in perfumery. It has adhesive or binder function and hence, u....