9911796707
TMI Blog2000 (3) TMI 467X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... TED BY : None, for the Appellant. Shri A. Ashokan, JDR, for the Respondent. [Order per : Gowri Shankar, Member (T)]. - These two appeals one by the assessee and other in the form of application under 35E(2) of the Act by the Collector are against the order of the Collector. By this order the Collector has held that the assessee manufactured various articles, classification of which has been do ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... gistered, as required in paragraph 4 of 175/86 as a small scale unit undertaking registered with the Director of Industries. No cross objection to this application appears to have been filed. The Collector has said that since the factory of the assessee at Surat was registered as a SSI (presumably with the appropriate authority in the government of Gujarat) benefit was available for clearances to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... , issued by him. Accordingly the assessee was not entitled to any term of paragraph 4 to the benefit of notification. No ground has been made out that it was covered by the proviso to paragraph 4. Accordingly we accept the contention in the appeal and hold that the benefit of notification was not available. 5. We now turn to the assessee's appeal. The first ground in the appeal is that cross ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... vidence put forth by the appellant before the Collector was a declaration by the landlord of the appellant's premises that it had no machinery installed, a letter of the Bombay Electric Supply Transport comments that the appellant did not have any industrial electric connection and copies of the electric bills to show low electricity consumption. It has not been established that electricity was no ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ification of other goods which have been classified either under heading 85.38 or 85.40. The reason given by the Collector for classification in his view, of the appearance and shape are not part of which was the claimed before him. We are therefore of the view that the classification of the goods are to be determined afresh. We however confirm the penalty imposition for the reason that duty was n ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
