1997 (12) TMI 450

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... for the Respondents. [Order per : J.H. Joglekar, Member (T)]. The dispute in this case is as to the determination of rate of duty in terms of Notification No. 213/86-C.E., dated 25-3-1986. This notification continued to extend the benefit of notifications earlier available to goods falling under Tariff Item 68 in the old tariff and prescribed duty @ 25% when calculated with reference to .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... t necessary to determine the effective rate leviable on the goods on their classification under the new tariff. On reading of the notification, we find this claim to be correct. In other words, the calculation is based not on the rate of duty that was attracted when the goods were under Tariff Item 68, but the rate or rates attracted by these goods when re-classified under the new tariff. The Assi .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X