TMI Blog2023 (7) TMI 666X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... documents pertaining to the import. Furthermore, it is seen that, without reference to the entries within heading 7307 of First Schedule to Customs Tariff Act, 1975, the HSN Explanatory Notes have been relied upon. Crucial to the displacement of a tariff item as declared, is the available of an alternative tariff item that must, independently conform to the goods. This has been held in the decision of the Hon ble Supreme Court in HPL CHEMICALS LTD. VERSUS CCE, CHANDIGARH [ 2006 (4) TMI 1 - SUPREME COURT] holding that If the Department intends to classify the goods under a particular heading or sub- heading different from that claim by the assessee, the Department has to produce proper evidence and discharge the burden of proof. In the pre ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... uplings, tees, crosses against bill of entry no. 5276675/14.10.2019 declared to be valued at ₹83,24,561/-. Effective rate of duty of 10% is applicable to the said goods in terms of notification no. 50/2017-Cus dated 30th June 2017 (serial no. 377). 2. We have heard Learned Counsel for the appellant and Learned Authorised Representative. It is seen that the lower authorities are both agreed upon re-classifying the impugned goods under the residual heading in tariff item 7307 2900 and it is seen from the impugned order that the first appellate authority has determined that the goods are neither flanges, threaded elbows, bends and sleeves leaving no option but for resort to the residual entry. Reliance for this was placed upon HSN ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Ltd v. Commissioner of Central Excise, Bombay [(1997) 2 SCC 677] that It is not in dispute before us as it cannot be, that owners of establishing that the said drinks fell within Item No. 22 lay on the Revenue. Revenue has led no evidence. The onus was not discharged, therefore, the Tribunal was right in rejecting the evidence that was produced on behalf of the appellant, the appeal should nevertheless have been allowed. 4. With the two rival classifications at the eight digit level within the same heading the resort to one alternative classification that is a residual entry, it would appear that the lower authorities have not given any justification for discarding the claim by the appellant or preferring the revised one over the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
