9911796707
TMI Blog1995 (1) TMI 140X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... issue in this appeal is the classification of the casting of bars manufactured by the aappellant and the consequential eligibility or otherwise in Notification 67/89-C.E. The appellant by his letter dated 6th October, 1994 has waived the hearing and requested a decision on merits. The Collector of Central Excise also filed a Cross-objection and was represented by Shri K.K. Jha, SDR. 2. The Cross ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ector confirmed the classification proposed. He noted that it had not been shown by the appellant that the copper was refined copper as defined in Note 1(a) to Chapter 74. He further observed that the copper bars which were obtained by casting were not subsequently worked and therefore, could not be considered bars or rods by virtue of provision of Note 1(b) to the Chapter. He did not accept the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . The cross-objection also relies on the fact that the cast copper rods had been shown as classifiable under that sub-heading under Notification 67/89-C.E., dated [1-3-1989]. 6. Refined copper has been defined in Note 1(a) to Chapter 74. According to this definition, refined copper should be metal containing at least 97.5% by weight of copper, provided that the content by weight of any element d ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nd upon what kind of alloy it is and would be under any of the sub-heading of Headings 7403.21 to 7403.29. Obviously the product is not made of a master alloy, since it does not confirm the requirement under Chapter Note 1. Neither the appellant nor the department is able to indicate what constitutes the remaining portion of the matter (1% or so). Therefore, unless this is determined, it would not ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
