TMI Blog1997 (7) TMI 353X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hri K.K. Anand, Advocate, for the Respondent. [Order per : J.H. Joglekar, Member (T)]. M/s. Rajasthan Industries and Scientific Corporation imported 600 sets of prisms for binocular head. The classification suggested by them was under Heading 90.11/12 as parts and accessories solely or principally for use in binocular head. The Assistant Collector however, classified the goods under Head ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nded in the appeal memorandum and by Shri Negi that the goods were described as prisms and that they were not mounted. We find in the Collector s order that the reply to the specific query the importers had claimed that the prisms were in the mounted condition ready for use and that each set was having four pieces of prisms. This specific statement of the Collector has not been negated in the appe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Bombay, reported in 1996 (88) E.L.T. 176 (Tribunal), the CEGAT held that reliance had to be placed on the information given by the technical experts. As regards the claim from the Revenue that the Collector s relevance on the citation placed before him was not justified, we find that both the citations namely 1983 (12) E.L.T. 161 (CEGAT) and 1983 (12) E.L.T. 183 (CEGAT) deal with the situation whe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
