2006 (11) TMI 221

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....-A passed by the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, New Delhi (CESTAT). 2. The question of law that arises for consideration is whether the finding of the CESTAT that the imported item, viz., pie tubes of different lengths sealed to a plastic base (metal base in the case of singe pie) with two leads from the assembly, constitutes compact fluorescent lamp (CFL) as per the Chapte....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....dated 16-4-2003 certified that the imported goods are only parts of CFL without choke. It was subsequently clarified that the test was based on the sample provided by the importer. However, there is nothing to suggest that the test report becomes unacceptable on that score alone. 4. The Appellant relied upon the decision of the Authority for Advance Rulings(AAR), New Delhi (Customs and Central ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....e notification. 5. We have the advantage of the decision in the case of Philips India Limited v. Commissioner of Customs, Mumbai, 2004 (166) E.L.T. 49 (Tri.-Mumbai) where the item imported appears to correspond with the item before us. There the item imported was a discharge tube mounted on a shell cover. The Tribunal in that case concluded that anti-dumping duty could not be imposed when only ....