9911796707
TMI Blog1996 (5) TMI 234X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nts. [Order per : J.H. Joglekar, Member (T)]. - This appeal from the Revenue is directed against the order of the Collector of Central Excise (Appeals) New Delhi dated 31-7-1986. The short facts leading to the dispute are as follows :- 2. M/s. Prajapati Metal Works manufactured stainless steel castings out of stainless steel scrap purchased from the open market, without holding a Central ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the manufacturers. He admitted the appeal and set aside the original order, giving rise to the present appeal by the Revenue. 4. Shri R.A. Sheikh, learned JDR appeared for the Revenue. Respondents were not present although notice had been served upon them. 5. Shri Sheikh citing from the appeal memorandum claimed that the goods were admittedly castings of stainless steel. Tariff Item 25 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... be covered under Tariff Item 25. Tariff Item 26 covered steel in primary form and the manufactured products of steel were covered under Tariff Item 26AA. Although the nature of the castings manufactured by M/s. Prajapati Metal Works has not been brought out in the lower proceedings, what can be seen from the original order was that the impugned goods were manufactured for their clients by M/s. Pr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... orks, on our holding that the learned Collector was wrong in classifying the products in this manner. We, therefore, set aside the order of the Collector and remand the case for de novo proceedings to the Assistant Collector who shall proceed to determine the claims of the respondents only on the aspect of time bar.
9. The appeal is disposed of accordingly. X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
