9911796707
TMI Blog2012 (8) TMI 628X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... oduced from the National Test House, an Affidavit filed by Mr. Sharma - case is remanded to the lower adjudicating authority to decide the issue afresh - Ex. Appeal No.104/04 - - - Dated:- 10-7-2012 - SHRI S. K. GAULE, DR. D. M. MISRA, JJ. Shri B. N. Chattopadhyay, Consultant Shri N. K. Chowdhury, Advocate for the Appellant (s) Shri S. Chakraborty, Asstt. Commissioner (A.R.) for t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ssification list, a proper procedure was not followed at the time of drawal of samples. The lower adjudicating authority confirmed the demand of Rs.16,30,594.65 classifying the product under Heading 3403.00 and imposed penalty of Rs.10,000/- against the appellants. Aggrieved by the same, the appellants filed the appeal before the ld. Commissioner (Appeals). The ld. Commissioner (Appeals) dismissed ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ation. The contention is that the composition of the product has not been taken into consideration while deciding the case on merit by both the lower authorities. The contention is that they have produced a Certificate dated 25.1.95 from National Test House, Alipore and they have also produced an Affidavit dt.22.5.2012 from Mr. Sharma, General Manager of the Appellant Company. They have also produ ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... before the lower adjudicating authority vide order dated 16.11.98. We find that both the lower authorities had decided the issue only on the ground that the proper procedure was not followed at the time of drawal of samples of the goods for testing. We find that all the other aspects, namely, production of certificate from the National Test House, an Affidavit filed by Mr. Sharma, have not been t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
