2009 (3) TMI 101

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ntially through the Rule 4 to Rule 8. The original authority has not disclosed the reasons for disregarding the transaction value except saying that there were imports at a higher contemporaneous price - Further no allegation that the declared price by the respondent is a manipulated one - enhancement of value not justified - C/929/2005 - C/112/2009(PB) - Dated:- 24-3-2009 - Justice R.M.S. Khan .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... e importer, Commissioner (Appeals) did not agree with the order of the original authority and allowed the appeal. 5. We find from the submissions and from the records, the respondent-importer has claimed before the Commissioner (Appeals) that they were importing on a larger scale and therefore, they were in a position to negotiate for a lower price. They also submitted that they were regularly .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... t sought to be compared has not been taken into account. Admittedly the respondent has made subsequent imports at the same price and the same has been accepted. Further no allegation that the declared price by the respondent is a manipulated one has been made. Under these circumstances, the order of the Commissioner (Appeals) in not sustaining the order of the original authority cannot be held unr .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X