9911796707
TMI Blog2022 (10) TMI 591X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... duty of the imported goods in terms of Notification No. 72/2001-CX., dated 12-2-2001 at the rate of US $ 180 per kg whereas they had originally paid duty at the rate of US $ 9.73 per kg in terms of Notification No. 81/97, dated 24-10-1997 - While calculating the CVD, the element of anti-dumping duty is to be excluded for arriving at the assessable value - since the goods had been found to be of T ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Singh Rawat, AOR, for the Respondent. ORDER The levy of anti-dumping duty on the acrylic fibre imported from United States of America, Thailand, and South Korea, in terms of Notification dated 24-10-1997, was the subject matter of the dispute between the parties before the Customs, Excise Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) - decided vide order dated 10-9-2002. The Tribunal substan ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t Notification was erroneously construed and the saving clause contained therein was overlooked by the CESTAT. 3. Upon remand, the Adjudicating Aurhtority reconfirmed its earlier order on the quantum of duty payable and penalty imposed thereon, and hence the matter once again reached the CESTAT in appeal. Vide the impugned second order by the CESTAT dated 16-2-2005, it has again remanded the ca ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... kg. (iv) the penalty imposed on the appellants is not to exceed 25% of the re-calculated duty amount. The matter will be decided by the adjudicating authority after hearing the appellants. 4. In our considered view, the above reproduced operative part of the CESTAT order dated 16-2-2005 causes no prejudice to the Appellant-Revenue as the same is in conformity with the first order of the Tr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
