2014 (1) TMI 479

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....peal. 2. The Learned advocate submits that while passing this stay order, some facts were escaped from the notice of the Bench which was argued by them. He drew the attention the Bench to the adjudication order. The adjudicating authority observed that the goods imported vide Bill of Entry No.438303 dt. 7.11.2002 are to be treated as CFL without choke. He further submits that CBEC vide circular No.528/53/2007-Cus. dt. 25.10.2007 clarified that final notification No.138/2002-Cus. dt. 10.12.2002 would cover two types of CFLs (i) Complete, ready to use, compact fluorescent lamps wherein choke is integrated within the lamp (ii) Complete, ready to use, compact fluorescent lamps wherein choke is external. It is contended that the Board has clari....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... sides and on perusal of the records, we find that it is appropriate to reproduce the relevant portion of the stay order as under :-              "After hearing both sides, we find force in the submissions of the Ld. AR. It is seen that in the case of Picasso Overseas (supra), the goods mentioned as CFL 2U-7W, PL Tube 9W & 11W, CFL2U-7W, which are similar in the present case. We also find that the applicant has furnished the bond for a provisional assessment for release of the goods in respect of demand of anti-dumping duty vide Notification No.128/2001 dt. 21.12.01, and on that basis proper officer has allowed to clear the goods. At any event, we find this issue has already been ....