Home Case Index All Cases Central Excise Central Excise + AT Central Excise - 2017 (8) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2017 (8) TMI 783 - AT - Central ExciseClassification of goods - plastic ropes - Whether the report of the chemical examiner is admissible or not if the same is admissible whether the goods are correctly classifiable as plastic ropes to demand duty or not? - Held that: - the report of the chemical examiner is doubtful. Accordingly, the same cannot be the basis to determine the quality/classification of the goods in question manufactured form LDPE. Whether any evidence has brought on record by the Revenue to allege that the goods in question are manufactured from LDPE or not? - Held that: - During the investigation, there was statement of the appellant that they never purchased LDPE and purchased HDPE and PP and no evidence has been brought on record by the Revenue that the appellant has purchased LDPE. In the absence of evidence on record without bringing on record how the goods manufactured from LDPE, the demands are not sustainable. Whether the show cause notice is sustainable or not? - Held that: - It is seen that as per test report, deniers of the goods in question is 305.55 which is equal to 339.5 decitex. As per Section XI of Textile and Textile Articles, clause 12 (A) (b) states that man-made fibres (including yarn of two or more mono-filaments of Chapter 54), measuring more than 9000 deniers which is equal to 10000 decitex as per HSN. The adjudicating authority without any reasoning classified the goods in question, one plastic ropes which less than 10000 deniers to demand duty. Therefore, without classifying the impugned goods, the adjudicating authority cannot demand duty from the appellant. On this account also, the demand is set aside - the SCN is also barred by limitation. Appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant.
|