2018 (5) TMI 518

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... d report dt. 04.10.2007 have indeed been prepared by the same officer whereas, as per para 13 of the Manual of Revenue Laboratories, if a party demands a re-test, the Chief Chemist is the appellate testing authority. The matter is remanded back to the adjudicating authority to get the goods re-tested at a higher appellate level - appeal allowed by way of remand. - Appeal No. C/197/2011 - Final .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... 5,45,385/- and proposing confiscation of goods and penalty under Section 112(a) of the Customs Act, 1962. The matter was adjudicated and the demand of duty was confirmed by classifying the goods under Tariff Heading 58041090. Redemption fine of ₹ 50,000/- was imposed and the penalty of ₹ 20,000/- was also imposed on the importer. In appeal, the order of Adjudicating Authority was uphe .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ned in the report dt. 31.10.2007, he could not show the same. 4. Ld. AR reiterated the finding in the order of the Commissioner (Appeals). 5. After hearing both the parties and perusing the records, we find that the issue in the present case pertains to the classification of the imported goods depending on whether the goods are Knitted fabric or Netted fabric. We find that first report dt. 2 .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X