9911796707
TMI Blog2000 (8) TMI 644X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... The Revenue has filed the present appeal being aggrieved with the order passed by the Commissioner (Appeals). 2. On 19-3-1991 Superintendent visited the respondents factory and drew 7 samples. Out of 7 samples 4 were found to be tea-waste on mutual examination. Three were sent for chemical test to find out as to whether the goods were tea waste as per Tea Waste (Control Order, 1959). The res ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r set aside the order of the Asstt. Commissioner. 4. I have heard Shri V.K. Chaturvedi, ld. SDR for the Revenue and Shri Amalendu Chakraborty, ld. Consultant for the respondents. 5. The Commissioner (Appeals) in her impugned order has observed as under :- Secondly, tea waste is defined in the Tea Waste (Control) Order of 1959 and Chemical Examiner s report confirms this definition. He also ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rder on the ground that the appellants have clandestinely removed tea and replaced the same with the teawaste. I do not find any evidence to that effect. As rightly observed by the Commissioner (Appeals) the definition of tea waste as defined in Tea Waste (Control) Order, 1959 is in consonance with chemical examiner s report. Nothing more has been produced by the Revenue at the appeal stage. I do ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
