2004 (6) TMI 497

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... SDR, for the Respondent. [Order per : S.L. Peeran, Member (J)]. - The miscellaneous application seeks for retention of the file in view of the fact that the appellants' office and factory is located within the jurisdiction of this Bench. The prayer is made in terms of the Public Notice No. 1/2001 issued by the Hon'ble President. Ld. DR confirmed that the appellants are located within the ju....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ellular. The appellants admit the imports having been made from the related person. They also admitted that difference with the comparison made with the imports of M/s. BPL Cellular is to an extent of 15.28% which difference is due to commercial and quantity level. They contended that their import was enormous while compared to the imports made by M/s. BPL Cellular and hence the value cannot be en....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....quantity levels. He submitted that as they have already pre-deposited substantial amounts in the matter, waiver could be given to them and appeal could be listed for out of turn hearing. 5. Ld. SDR pointed out that both the authorities have considered all the pleas and have accepted the appellants' plea to load the value by 17.28%. He referred to the written submissions filed before the Co....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....he Commissioner (Appeals) and the Commissioner (Appeals) directed for loading the value by 17.83% instead of 20% as the difference in price is 35.67% instead of 39.67%. In view of this submission made by the appellants themselves, they cannot now raise a different ground on the aspect of their imports being at a higher level and should not be compared with the imports by M/s. BPL Cellular. However....