2007 (7) TMI 154

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... have been taken from storage yard or from buyers end – Held that appellants are given benefit of doubt so product is classifiable under 26.19
[Order per : Chittaranjan Satapathy, Member (T)]. - Heard both sides. 2. The appellants use zinc in their galvanizing line for galvanizing steel products. This is done by putting steel products in zinc bath. The Ld. Counsel for the appellants Shri S.P. .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ch dross in view of the subsequent decisions of the Apex Court in the case of Commr. of Central Excise v. Indian Aluminium Co. Ltd. reported in 2006 (203) E.L.T. 3 (S.C.), yet 10% duty has been paid on the same at the material time during the period 1991-93. 3. Heard the Ld. D.R. who supports the impugned order. 4. We find that the contention made by the appellants all along that the test report .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X