9911796707
TMI Blog2002 (8) TMI 203X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . of Nitrided Low Carbon Ferro Manganese and claimed its classification under Chapter sub-heading 7202.19. The Departmental Authorities allowed clearance of the goods after the importer executed a provisional duty bond subject to receipt of test report on the sample taken out for test and sent to Central Revenue Control Laboratory. On receipt of the test report it was found that the sample was found to contain 95.10% by weight of manganese and 0.06% by weight of carbon. The Chemical Examiner who tested the sample also opined that the goods were other than ferro manganese. Accordingly the authorities below held that the goods were classifiable under Chapter heading 81.11 and confirmed the demand for differential duty. Hence the appeal before ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ted that no percentage of iron has been indicated and therefore, the natural presumption should be that percentage of iron was 4% or more. It was contended by the Consultant for the appellants that a request for re-test was made which could not be complied with as no remnant sample was available. At this stage when the Bench asked the Consultant whether a request was made for cross-examination of the chemical examiner who tested the sample, the reply of the Consultant was that it was not done. On the other hand, the Revenue contended that the goods were declared as Nitrided Low Carbon Ferro Manganese. It was submitted that in addition to Manganese and carbon the sample would have contained Nitrided also. It was submitted that chemically, th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e presence of iron to the extent of 4%. Further we note that there is a categorical opinion of the Chemical Examiner that the sample sent for testing was other than ferro manganese. The opinion of the expert (Chemical Examiner) is that the goods are other than ferro manganese. Even if the contention of the learned Consultant is taken into consideration then the percentage of iron present in the sample cannot be 4% or more. 7. We have also perused the contention of both the sides on the Chapter Notes and Section Notes. Looking to all the facts we hold that the product shall be classifiable under Chapter heading 81.11. 8. On the question of jurisdiction in issue of show-cause notice, we note that no doubt misdeclaration and suppression of f ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
