TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2017 (2) TMI 138
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... ORDER Per M V Ravindran This appeal is directed against Order-in-Appeal No. 374/2006/MCH/AC/Gr.2B1/06 dated 18th August 2006. 2. None appeared on behalf of the appellant despite notice. Since the appeal is of 2006, we take up the appeal for disposal. 3. The issue that falls for consideration is whether the lower authorities were correct in enhancing the value of "EUDRAGIT-l 30d-55" (....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... 5. Learned Departmental Representative would support the order and submits that the identical goods were imported by another importer and the contemporaneous imports details were applied for enhancing the value. It is his submission that the contemporaneous imports details as given by the appellant needs to be verified. 6. On careful consideration of the submission made by both sides, we fin....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....has been for import of 480 Kgs., while quantity imported by appellant is 2160 Kgs. We find that there is definitely substantial difference in the quantity imported by the appellant and another importer. The sheer quantity advantage that appellant has on import of such chemicals could have also influenced the price as the quantity of 480 Kgs. imported by another importer being 25% of quantity impor....