1997 (4) TMI 247

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... [Order per : K.S. Venkataramani, Member (T)]. The issue involved in the appeal is relating to the demand of duty on the plain glass tube manufactured by the appellants. The department initiated proceedings against the appellants by the show cause notice dated 21-8-1989, alleging that the appellants had wrongly declared plain glass tube as laboratory glassware. The plain glass tubes were c .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ppellants had suppressed the facts regarding correct description of the plain glass tube with the intention to evade payment of duty. He demanded duty of Rs. 10,213/- and imposed penalty of Rs. 2,000/-. When the matter was called, none was present for the appellants who have requested for decision on merits. 2. We have heard Shri Gurdeep Singh, the ld. DR for the department who pointed out that .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... duty in this case and in that context the duty beyond being six months should be struck down. 4. We have carefully considered the submissions. The perusal of the classification list submitted by the appellants shows that they have shown plain glass tubes along with laboratory glassware which they have also declared in the classification list. The records indicate that the department detected the .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X