2016 (12) TMI 1388

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....sp; V.K. Agarwal, Addl.Comm.(AR) for the respondent ORDER This appeal is filed against Order-in-Original No. 08/Commissioner /Goa/CX/2007 dated 30.03.2007. 2. The relevant facts that arise for consideration are the appellant herein during the period March 2005 to April 2005 manufactured and cleared "Integrated Fixed Wireless Terminals CDMA-2000-1X (ETS 2288) classifying the same under Chapter h....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....anufacturer M/s. Teracom P. Ltd. was situated in the same Commissionerate.  6. Ld. DR on the other hand reiterates the findings of the Adjudicating Authority and submits detailed findings are given as to how CDMA WLL phones are different from cellular phones. 7. On examination of the case records and consideration of the submission made by both sides, we find that the issue involved is whet....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....on cellular technology.  The ratio is in paragraph 22 which we respectfully reproduce. "22. Reasons given in the impugned order for distinguishing the decision of Supreme Court in Tata Teleservices are not sustainable in law The Commissioner has held that there was no dispute before the Supreme Court that the phone considered by the Supreme Court, namely LSP 340 worked on Cellular technolo....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....er dated 13-12-2005 [2006 (194) E.L.T. 11 (S.C.)] observed that "...since there is no dispute that the technology used in the Fixed Wireless Telephone LSP 340 and the hand held mobile phone is the same, there is no warrant to limit either the tariff entry or the exemption notification to hand held cellular phones. Neither the range nor the size should make the difference." The order of the Hon'ble....