9911796707
TMI Blog1996 (12) TMI 207X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... : J.H. Joglekar, Member (T)]. The appellants were manufacturing yarn falling under Heading 5504. They had declared the composition of such yarn in two classification lists the first being 26/86, dated 26-10-1986 effective from 27-10-1986 and the second classification list was 18/87, dated 29-7-1987 effective from 1-3-1987. The classification claimed was under 5504.22 which entry read as foll ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... red during the period November, 1986 to August, 1987. The Collector after hearing the assessees, confirmed the demand, confiscated the goods but allowed their redemption on payment of a fine of Rs. 1 lakh and also imposed a penalty of Rs. 1 lakh. The present appeal is directed against this order. 3. Shri Kamal Parsurampuria, Advocate stated that both ramie and flax were vegetable fibres and fell ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ation, there was no warrant for imposition of penalty upon them. 4. Shri G. D. Sharma, JDR arguing for the Revenue maintained that the assessees had mis-represented the facts. He stated that the approval of the classification list was in fact for use of ramie fibre and did not extend when flax fibre was used. On this argument he supported the orders of confirmation of duty as well as of confisca ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... or flax fibre in the composition. When the classification list was accepted with this infirmity, there is no warrant for the Revenue to claim later that the assessees had made a wrong statement with an intent to evade payment of duty. On perusal of the classification lists, and especially the remarks made therein it is not possible to uphold the extention of extended period. The demand will have t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
