9911796707
TMI Blog2014 (11) TMI 955X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sable value of the export goods on the basis of bench mark price of CCCMMC without supplying the said evidence/ data to the Respondent, we had remanded the matter to the ld. Adjudicating Authority for re-determination of the assessable value, after supplying the necessary date to the Respondent, in the appellants own case [2014 (8) TMI 213 - CESTAT KOLKATA]. Accordingly, following the said preced ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... for disposal. 2. Ld. Special Counsel, Shri A.K. Das appearing for the Revenue submitted that the first issue relates to determination of assessable value of export goods viz. Iron Ore Fines, by adopting the FOB price as the assessable value or treating the said price as cum duty value, for goods exported by the Respondent, involving the period after 01.01.2009. He submits that the issue had been ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... that the present case also be remanded for the said purpose. 3. Ld. CA for the Respondent has not disputed the above facts and submitted that he has no objection in remanding the case to the ld. Adjudicating Authority for determination of the assessable value. However, he pleads that a time-frame may be fixed for deciding the issue. 4. We find that this Tribunal had already decided the issue of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... FO/A/75218-75246/2014 dated 30.04.2014. Accordingly, following the said precedent, for determination of the value, we remand the case to the ld. Adjudicating Authority for deciding the issue afresh after supplying the relevant data to the Respondent. Needless to mention a reasonable opportunity be allowed to the Appellant. This issue may be decided, preferably within three months from the date of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
