2005 (2) TMI 297 - AT - Customs

Summary

Issues: Appeal against order-in-appeal regarding liability to pay anti-dumping duty on imported goods under Notification No. 128/2001.

Analysis:
1. The Revenue contended that Compact Fluorescent Lamps without choke are liable to anti-dumping duty under the notification.
2. Respondent argued that the imported goods were not complete Fluorescent Lamps as other parts were required for completion, which they did not import.
3. The Authority for Advance Ruling decision and ERTL report were cited by the respondent to support their argument.
4. The dispute revolved around whether the imported goods fell under the scope of the notification for anti-dumping duty.
5. The notification specified that Compact Fluorescent Lamps from China by a specific manufacturer are subject to anti-dumping duty, which the respondents did not dispute.
6. The decision in a previous case was distinguished as the goods imported by the respondents were different.
7. The examination of samples by ERTL and Customs authorities was discussed, with the Commissioner (Appeals) not relying on the report due to procedural issues.
8. It was concluded that the imported goods were Compact Fluorescent Tubes requiring only a choke and holder to complete, falling under the notification for anti-dumping duty.

This comprehensive analysis of the judgment highlights the arguments presented by both parties, the legal interpretation of the notification, and the reasoning behind the decision to set aside the order-in-appeal and hold the respondents liable to pay anti-dumping duty on the imported goods.