9911796707
TMI Blog1997 (9) TMI 309X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed uncoated with sheared edges. Metal steel carbon steel sheets - seconds. Size 160 x 458.030 mm Chemical composition : 0.12% C S 0.05% 0.02% P 0.2 % CO 0.60% N 0.01% SL 2. The classification was shown under Heading No. 72.09 of the Customs Tariff which covered flat rolled products of iron or non-alloy steel of a width of 600 mm or more, cold rolled (cold reduced) not clad, plated or coated The goods were assessed to duty under sub-heading No. 7209.44 which covered the flat rolled products not in coils, not further worked than cold rolled, (cold reduced), of a thickness of less than 0.5 mm. The customs duty was paid on ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... He also submitted that the coated sheets were not classifiable under Heading No. 72.09 and that the coated sheets were classifiable under Heading No. 72.10. As the goods at the time of assessment had been described under Heading No. 72.09 and it has been specifically noted by the importers on the Bill of Entry, it is clear that the goods imported were not coated. He referred to the invoice where the description has been given as under : M.S. Carbon sheets Second/defective coated or uncoated tin free steel waste - soft tin grade in original metal packing as intended No. 9239, dated June 18, 1987 of M/s. Sunder Sekhar. It was his submission that it was a question of fact that whether the sheets were coated or not coated. The Appellant h ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Cell, Custom House, Madras to file an appeal on my behalf before the Customs, Excise Gold (Control). Appellate Tribunal, New Delhi against the said order. The goods in question are eligible for the benefit of Notification 57/87 under Sl. No. 2 and Order-in-Appeal extending the benefit of Notification No. 57/87 under Sl. No. 6 is not correct. 7. We find that the Collector had referred to the reasons recorded in the brief facts of the case which had been enclosed with the order, in terms of sub-section (2) of Section 129A of the Customs Act, 1962. He has referred that he was of the considered opinion that Order-in-Appeal was neither legal nor proper. For all these reasons, he had authorised the Assistant Collector of Customs to file an ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... which the sheets were coated. We find that the ld. Collector of Customs (Appeals) had not given any reason as to how the goods were covered by S. No. 6 of the Notification No. 57/87-Cus., dated 1-3-1987. In the test report referred to by the appellant, there is no reference to the coating aspect of the sheets and only refers to the composition of steel utilised in the manufacture of the sheets in question. This test certificate only refers to general chemical composition. 10. In view of the above discussion, we consider that the views taken by the ld. Collector of Customs (Appeals) is not based on facts on record. As a result, we do not agree with his views and as a result the appeal filed by the Revenue is allowed. - - TaxTMI - TMITax ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
