9911796707
TMI Blog2023 (7) TMI 969X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... peal is filed by the Revenue challenging an order dated 03 December, 2021 passed by the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT), whereby Customs Appeal No. 85400 of 2019 filed by the respondent-assessee has been allowed. 2. The Revenue has raised the following substantial questions of law:- "(a) Whether, in the facts and circumstances of the case, the CESTAT was right in hol ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... red under definition of nominal thickness of 4 mm [as per Bureau of Indian Standards (BIS) 14900:2000], hence, the goods were liable for anti-dumping duty at the rate of USD 58.22/MT, in terms of Notification No. 48/2014- Customs (ADD) dated 11 December, 2014 at Sr. No. 1. On such premise, the goods were seized and subsequently allowed to be released provisionally on certain conditions. 4. On scr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... re the tribunal, the respondent contended that in so far as import in question was concerned, the impugned order demanding anti-dumping duty in terms of the said notification was not justified, in as much as not only in respondents' own case, but also in case of one Mudit Glassworks Palace, the Commissioner of Customs, Nhava Sheva had passed an order dated 20 February, 2020 (order No. 835/2019-20/ ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... learned counsel for the appellant- Revenue. We have perused the record, as also the impugned order passed by the tribunal. Mr. Mishra's submissions are not different from what were advanced before the Tribunal. It clearly appears that not only in the case of Mudit Glassworks Place (supra), but also in respondent's own case in respect of similar imports, the demand of anti-dumping duty was dropped. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
