2016 (12) TMI 838

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... r the Respondent-Revenue ORDER Per Mr. V. Padmanabhan: The appeal is directed against the Order-in-Appeal dated 30.11.2006 passed by the Commissioner (Appeals), Raipur. The dispute relates to classification of the following two products manufactured and cleared by the appellants: S. No. Product As per appellant As per department 1. Guard of Kiln Ring Gear 8417 8483 2. Travelli .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... sification it will be necessary to consider the nature of the product, the function of the same and the nature of machinery in which the goods are proposed to be used. The Commissioner (Appeals) has given the following findings: "8. I have gone through the facts of the case on records and submission of the party, written as well as during personal hearing. 9. The party have already voluntarily .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... als) has observed that the assessee has not placed on record any corroborative technical opinion to support their claim. He has also referred to common parlance test which has been prescribed by the Honble Supreme Court to decide the classification. We are of the view that the classification of such goods can be finalized only after going through detailed technical write-up regarding nature of th .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X