2009 (11) TMI 649

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....the investigation done by the designated authority with reference to levy of anti-dumpting duty. The petitioner executed a bond for provisional assessment as per the directions of the third respondent and cleared the goods. Subsequently on the basis of the notification dated 10-12-2002, in Notification No. 138/2002, a final demand was raised for a sum of Rs. 2,73,31,320/- for the three imports allowed clearance provisionally. Aggrieved by this, the petitioner filed an appeal before the second respondent. The second respondent without observing the principles of natural justice dismissed the appeal filed by the petitioner. The petitioner challenged the said order before the Tribunal, the first respondent herein. The Tribunal by order dated 1....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....he Coordinate Bench in Mumbai in the case of Harsh International v. Commissioner of Customs, Mumbai reported in 2007 (217) E.L.T. 528, or in the alternative if the first respondent does not agree with the view of the Co-ordinate Bench case, refer the matter to the Larger Bench for a decision. In the circumstances, the present writ petition has been filed. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner pointed out that when the order had already been made by the Co-ordinate Bench on an identical circumstance, the first respondent should give exemption of duty and take up the appeal on merit. Hence, the Tribunal had failed to adhere to the prima facie case made out by the petitioner and the petitioner firm is entitled to get waiver of pre-depo....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....erred to the decision of the Apex Court reported in 1985 (19) E.L.T. 22 (S.C.) - Assistant Collector of Central Excise, West Bengal v. Dunlop India Ltd. and Others and 2006 (204) E.L.T. 513 (S.C.) - Benara Valves Ltd. v. Commissioner of Central Excise as well as 1989 (39) E.L.T. 178 (S.C.) - Vijay Prakash D. Mehata's case to direct the petitioner to deposit the entire anti-dumping duty within a period of eight weeks from the date of hearing i.e. on 7-9-2009 and subject to compliance thereof, the appeal of the petitioner should be taken up. 6. The decision relied on by the learned counsel cannot be applied straight away to this case on hand. The question as to the dispensing with the payment of duty is a discretionary one to be exerc....