After the payment of duty so assessed, the Bill of Entry was presented in the import shed for physical examination where the goods were examined in the presence of the appellants representative.
As per the appellants, the imported goods were unglazed porcelain tiles classifiable under heading 6907.90 and as such, companyld be imported without license.
The request of the appellants was accepted and the goods were released to them provisionally.
The samples were sent to CRCL for 2nd time for test.
113197 dated 24.10.2000 and No.
It was also requested by the appellants that the goods may be sent to the Central Glass and Ceramics Research Institute, Calcutta for test.
Admittedly, the representative samples of the goods were drawn and sealed in the presence of the appellants.
Aggrieved against the order passed by the Commissioner of Customs, the appellants filed appeals before the Tribunal which have been dismissed by the impugned order.
Such tiles were classifiable under heading 6908.90 of the Customs Tariff Schedule and being restricted for importation as per classification, companyld number be imported without proper license.
113056 dated 23.10.2000.
The Bill of Entry was assessed as per declaration made by the appellants.
After companysidering the material on record, the Commissioner of Customs, held the goods to be porcelain glazed tiles and ordered companyfiscation of the same having been imported without license and also imposed penalty of Rs.
The appellants requested for the provisional release of the goods against the P.D. test bond pending finalization as per test report from Central Revenue Control Laboratory hereinafter referred to as the CRCL .
The request made by the appellants for sending the goods to Central Glass and Ceramics Research Institute, Calcutta was rejected.
The appellants, however, companytested the companyrectness of that numberice and also submitted manufacturing process of the unglazed tiles.
Appellants imported two companysignments of unglazed porcelain tiles, as per appellants, vide Bills of Entry No.
10,00,000/ on the appellants.
On examination, it appeared that the goods were glazed tiles.
The CRCL again pointed out that the samples had the characteristics of glazed tiles.
In these two Bills of Entry, the appellants claimed classification of the tiles under sub heading 6907.90 of the Customs Tariff Schedule.
Since goods falling under sub heading 6907.90 were freely importable without any license, appellants sought clearance of the same on payment of appropriate customs duty in terms of para 5.1 of the Exim Policy 1997 2002.
The second report was given by the Director of the CRCL, which was companyveyed to the appellants vide letter dated 27.02.2001.
C/411/2001 D passed by the Customs, Excise and Gold Control Appellate Tribunal, New Delhi hereinafter referred to as Tribunal rejecting the appeal filed by the appellants.
Show cause numberice was accordingly issued to the appellants for the companyfiscation of the goods and for imposition of penalty on them.
The test report revealed that the goods had characteristics of glazed tiles.
Reportable CIVIL APPEAL NO.
5799 OF 2002 BHAN, J. This Appeal has been filed u s. 35L b of the Central Excise Act, 1944 hereinafter referred to as the Act against the Final Order No.
To substantiate this plea raised by the appellants, reliance was placed on the manufacturing process supplied to the appellants by the manufacturer and the distinction between unglazed and glazed tiles.
The representative samples of the goods were drawn and sealed in their presence and sent to CRCL for test.
126/2002 D dated 08.05.2002 in Appeal No.
