9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (1) TMI 472X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... case is regarding the classification of 'Fused Silica'. The importer respondent sought classification under chapter heading 2505 1019 while the department classified the same under 7018 2000. Aggrieved by such classification, an appeal was preferred to the first appellate authority. The first appellate authority after following the due process of law set aside the assessment only on the ground that the assessing officer has not issued any show-cause notice to appellant nor any hearing was granted nor any speaking order was given to classify the product under chapter 7018. 5. It is the case of the revenue in the grounds of appeal that the first appellate authority has not considered the issue from the point of limitation as the appeal was ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hat the impugned order is in a way contesting the issue only on a technical question i.e. first appellate authority has allowed the appeal stating that adjudicating authority has not issued a show-cause notice in violation of principles of natural justice for reclassification. To that extent, we find that the appeal of the revenue is correct; that the first appellate authority should have remanded the matter back for classification of the products. Since we are apprised of the issue and cross objection filed by the respondent is also on record, we decide the issue on classification based upon the documents available on record. 8. The issue of classification of the product 'Fused Silica' needs to be addressed from the point of the rival sub ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s raised by the ld. Departmental Representative is that the respondent has not provided any evidence of classification of the product under chapter 25. In our considered view, it is a settled law that in cases where department seeks reclassification it is their duty to produce evidence in support of their claim. In the absence of any such evidence from the department side, we are of the view that the classification declared by the respondent is to be accepted. 11. Yet another point which was raised by the Departmental Representative that there was a delay in filing the appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals) and the delay was not condoned. We find from the records, the appellant had filed an application for condonation of delay before the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
