2014 (3) TMI 601

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... Pallavi Sridhar, Advocate, for the Respondent. ORDER Revenue is in appeal against the impugned order for non-confiscation of the goods imported by the respondents and also for not demanding the duty. 2. The facts of the case are that the respondents imported Malaysian Round Logs and filed bill of entry on 21-4-2005. On verification of the goods it was found that there was excess qu....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....scation of the impugned goods. 3. Heard both sides. 4. In this case Revenue has failed to prove that the respondent has paid any amount over and above the transaction value. Therefore, although there is an excess quantity of the goods but transaction value is not affected, therefore that transaction value is accepted. Accordingly question of demand of differential duty does not ari....