9911796707
TMI Blog1996 (3) TMI 205X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tive consumption are concerned. However, it has been held that of the impugned goods are sold to consumers then the benefit of the notification would not be available to the appellants. The appellants are contesting the order on the following ground : (i) that the crushed fruits which have been administered with sodium metabisulphate and not brine in sulphur water for provisional preservation for the duration of transport are not in a marketable condition and that they are not goods. (ii) The second contention is that they are not put in unit container designed to hold a pre-determined quantity or number and that they are being sent in a container which is not designed to hold a pre-determined weightage or number and is transported to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the product therein has been held to be classifiable under sub-heading 2001.90. 3. Ld. DR reiterated the findings. It is his contention that the product is marketable, as can be seen from the pleadings and it is an admitted fact that these products are being sold to other consumers and even exported to Nepal. It is his further contention that the product is being packed in a unit container and Note to Section 2 indicates that the `unit container means a container whether large or small (for example tin, cane, box, jar, bottle bag or carton drum) does not to hold a pre-determined quantity or number. It is his contention that it is admitted fact that the item is being transported. It is his further contention that the container holds a s ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... it is sold to other parties. This is a issue for factual verification and as such the appellants are seeking the basis by which revenue has held the goods to be marketable and an opportunity to place sufficient evidence to disprove the revenue s contention. This is a valid plea. The revenue has not placed the basis by which it has come to the conclusion of the product being marketable. Hence, on the point, we accept the plea for remand for de novo proceedings. The second point on which we feel that the matter is required to be remanded is that the product on being considered as `goods , are required to satisfy the description as given in the chapter heading for the purpose of classification. For the purpose of classification in a particu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
