9911796707
TMI Blog2005 (2) TMI 567X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... umar, Advocate, for the Appellant. Shri H.C. Verma, JDR, for the Respondent. [Order per : V.K. Agrawal, Member (T)]. - The issue involved in this appeal filed by M/s. Sunint Auto Pvt. Ltd. is whether 100% Polyester Curtain Fabric imported by them is classifiable under heading No. 60.02 of the Schedule to the Central Excise Tariff Act as claimed by them or under Heading 58.04 of the Tariff as c ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... from the learned Commissioner (Appeals) for sending the samples drawn from the impugned goods for test to the Textile Committee; that the personal observations of the Adjudicating Authority about the nature of the goods cannot be accepted for discarding the expert opinion given by the Textile Committee. 3. Learned D.R. on the other hand has submitted that initially the Appellants have class ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... E [1990 (50) E.L.T. 316 (Tri.)]. 4. We have considered the submissions of both the sides. The Textile Committee has clearly given its opinion that the fabric in question is warp knitted fabric. The Revenue has not brought on record any other opinion of any expert in this field to counter the opinion expressed by the Textile Committee. The Revenue has placed reliance on the personal observati ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tter Textile Committee, in its opinion, characterized the fabric as knitted fabric. In the case of Mehta Nettings (P) Ltd. the issue relates to the classification of the Round Mosquito netting fabrics and the dispute was between Tariff Heading 58.04 and 52.06. There was no dispute as to whether the fabric was knitted. We, therefore, set aside the impugned Order and allow the appeal. X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
