2006 (7) TMI 82

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ioner of Customs (Appeals), Cochin. 2.The respondent had filed a Bill of Entry describing the imported goods as 'Saving Lamps (Electrical Goods)' falling under CSH 8539.29. The goods were cleared accepting the above classification. Revenue proceeded against the respondents for recovery of Anti-Dumping Duty imposed on Compact Fluorescent Lamps (CFL) imported from the Peoples Republic of China/Hong....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....point, which has been mentioned, is that Anti-Dumping Duty is leviable on the CFL falling under sub-heading 8539.31. But the impugned items were classified under sub-heading 8539.29 and even in the Adjudication order, the classification of goods has not been changed. Therefore, the Commissioner (Appeals) dropped the proceedings against the respondents. 3. Revenue is aggrieved over the impugned or....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....wn order. It is not correct as per law. The Commissioner (Appeals) is correct in holding that Section 154 of the Customs Act cannot be invoked in the manner in which it has been done by the Adjudicating Authority. Section 154 is only for correction of clerical errors. Hiking a demand of Rs. 2,01,650/- to Rs. 97,91,176/- is by no stretch of imagination can be called as a correction of a clerical er....