On 11.8.88 a sample of the appellants product was taken by the respondents but returned within one week without testing on the ground that the issue was being finalised by the assistant companylector.
In the appeal preferred to the companylector, the appellants again raised the issue specifically that the process followed by and the product of the appellants were identical with that of M s. Chandulal K. Patel and Company and that the appellants product should be similarly classified under heading 24.01.
On 4.8.88 a decision was taken by the assistant companylector to classify the appellants product under tariff heading, 24.04.
The point was again taken specifically in the appellants appeal before the customs, excise and gold companytrol appellate tribunal.
While upholding the decision of the assistant companylector, the companylector did number companysider this aspect of the matter at all.
