2001 (8) TMI 762

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... K. Jain, SDR, for the Respondent. [Order per : G.R. Sharma, Member (T)]. A rguing the case for the applicants Shri C.A. Sundaram, ld. Sr. Advocate with Shri Harbhajan Singh and Shri Alok Agarwal, ld. Advocates submitted that in the grounds of appeal it was specifically stated that there was denial of justice inasmuch as principles of natural justice were not followed by the adjudicating a .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... Customs Act, it is not in dispute that the said Rule provides for ascertaining the value of the goods vis-a-vis the market price of the goods in India. Ld. Counsel argued that this Rule was wrongly applied in their case. He submits that Rule 8(2)(ii) of the Customs Valuation Rules, 1988 provided. (2) No value shall be determined under the provisions of this Rule on the basis of a system which pr .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... . DR also submits that the application for rectification of mistake is nothing but a plea for re-hearing the appeal. He submits that the Tribunal does not have power to review its own order. 3. Ld. Counsel in support of his contention submits that the Tribunal has the power to rectify mistake. He cited and relied upon the judgment of the Hon ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Ram Kirpal v. UO .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X