2007 (5) TMI 374

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....elf. 2. After examining the records and hearing both sides, we note that the appellants had imported what they declared in the relevant Bill of Entry as "Sealed Glass Tubes" and classified therein under CTH 70022090 (this classification is claimed to have been subsequently amended to CTH 85399090) and paid applicable duties of customs other than anti-dumping duty. However, they could not obtain clearance of the goods on account of a dispute which arose between them and the Customs authorities. The authorities sought to recover anti-dumping duty on the goods under Notification No. 138/2002-Cus., dated 10-12-2006 by holding the goods to be "Compact Fluorescent Lamps" (CFL) after getting a sample of the goods tested at the Electronics ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....t payment of anti-dumping duty at Chennai, Delhi and Navi Mumbai ports. The annexure to the affidavit seeks to support this plea contained in the affidavit. In the circumstances, according to Sr. Counsel, the appellants have a strong case against any direction for pre-depositing penalty. 4. We have heard ld. SDR also, who has opposed this application on the strength of the findings recorded in the impugned order. Adverting to the facts of the case, ld. SDR submits that the goods imported by the appellants is a CFL without Choke and plastic end-cap. This claim has been sought to be rebutted by ld. Counsel by showing us a sample of the goods. He has also shown us the so-called "plastic end-cap" along with a 'choke-PCB assembly'. It is....