Home Case Index All Cases Central Excise Central Excise + AT Central Excise - 2011 (6) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2011 (6) TMI 338 - AT - Central ExciseClassification - Lace falling under Chapter heading 58.04 or Braids falling under heading 58.08 - Held that:- As decided in Poulose & Mathen Vs. Collr.C.E. [1997 (2) TMI 98 - SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] has held that where in matters of classification dispute, when two opinions are possible, assessee should be given benefit of doubt and the opinion favourable to him should be given effect to. Similarly, in the case of Collr. of Customs, Madras Vs. Lotus Inks (1996 (9) TMI 133 - SUPREME COURT OF INDIA), it stand held that when two views are possible, one in favour of the assessee, would guide the classification. The Tribunal, in the case of CC Trichy Vs. Transmedia (India) Ltd. (2007 (4) TMI 406 - CESTAT, CHENNAI) has held that when there are different test reports, the one in favour of the assessee has to be adopted. In the case of Anish Kumar Spinning Mills Vs. CC (2004 (5) TMI 172 - CESTAT, CHENNAI), it has been held that one expert opinion cannot be rejected by another unless sufficient independent reasons exist to reject the former. In the light of the law declared in above decisions, the Commissioner has held the product to be lace by heavily relying upon the opinion of Shri Basu, former Additional Commissioner of Customs & Central Excise. Inasmuch as the SASMIRA and Bombay Textile Research Association's reports are clearly in favour of the assessee, no reason to take a stand different from their opinion. Thus correct classification of the product is falling under 58.08 as braids - Decided in favour of assessee.
|