2002 (12) TMI 549

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ar, SDR, for the Respondent. [Order per : Archana Wadhwa, Member (J)]. Demand of duty of Rs. 22,23,180.00 has been confirmed against the appellants and an identical amount of personal penalty has been imposed on the findings that handles, hinges manufactured by the appellants for motor vehicles are to be properly classifiable under Heading 8302.00 and not as motor vehicle parts under Hea .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... yment of duty. Prima facie , we do not agree with the above findings of the adjudicating authority as the claim of wrong classification cannot be equated with suppression or mis-statement on the part of the assessee so as to give rights to the Revenue to invoke the longer period of limitation. The appellants have admittedly filed the classification under Heading 8708.00, the Revenue was within it .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X