2023 (7) TMI 969

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....t : None   P.C.: 1. This appeal is filed by the Revenue challenging an order dated 03 December, 2021 passed by the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT), whereby Customs Appeal No. 85400 of 2019 filed by the respondent-assessee has been allowed. 2. The Revenue has raised the following substantial questions of law:- "(a) Whether, in the facts and circums....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....s revenue's case that such range of the thickness was covered under definition of nominal thickness of 4 mm [as per Bureau of Indian Standards (BIS) 14900:2000], hence, the goods were liable for anti-dumping duty at the rate of USD 58.22/MT, in terms of Notification No. 48/2014- Customs (ADD) dated 11 December, 2014 at Sr. No. 1. On such premise, the goods were seized and subsequently allowed to b....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....he thickness of the goods was between 3.73 mm to 3.86 mm. Before the tribunal, the respondent contended that in so far as import in question was concerned, the impugned order demanding anti-dumping duty in terms of the said notification was not justified, in as much as not only in respondents' own case, but also in case of one Mudit Glassworks Palace, the Commissioner of Customs, Nhava Sheva had p....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....terms of the said notification. 6. We have heard Mr. Mishra, learned counsel for the appellant- Revenue. We have perused the record, as also the impugned order passed by the tribunal. Mr. Mishra's submissions are not different from what were advanced before the Tribunal. It clearly appears that not only in the case of Mudit Glassworks Place (supra), but also in respondent's own case in respect ....