9911796707
TMI Blog2000 (11) TMI 358X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... de, JDR, for the Respondents. [Order per : Gowri Shankar, Member (T)]. The dispute in this appeal revolves around whether the goods imported by the appellant are zinc ash or zinc dross. The supplier of the goods described them in its invoice as galvaniser zinc ash. A test by analyst in West Germany, where the goods were shipped (being of a Swiss origin) indicated the metal content to be ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e metal content is unacceptable, and demands and explanation. It was for this purpose that cross examination had been asked of the Chief Chemist which was denied on the ground that the order of the Collector (Appeals) (by which the matter was remanded to the Assistant Collector for adjudication after disclosing to the importer the material that the department relied upon) did not contain any such ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... mean, that it is estopped from questioning the findings of such retest. This is all the more so in view of the wide difference in the metal content shown in the report of the Deputy Chief Chemist and Chief Chemist. Such a wide difference demands some explanation which has not been provided. The Chief Chemist is in the nature of an independent expert and opinion of an export is required to be test ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
