2002 (9) TMI 145

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....eing disposed of by this common order. 2.The facts of the case in brief are that the appellants imported certain consignments of acrylic staple fibre and declared them to be of Taiwanese origin. They filed Bills of Entry. The goods were cleared on payment of duty. Enquiries later on conducted revealed that the goods were of Thailand origin on which anti-dumping duty was leviable in terms of Notification No. 81/97. The appellants paid the duty and also paid 25% of the penalty imposed within one month from the date of the order. 3.Arguing the case for the appellant Shri L.P. Asthana, ld. Counsel submitted that the appellants had paid higher amount of anti-dumping duty which was provisionally determined but subsequently was reduced. He, ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....at in so far as the recalculation of duty on account of the final anti-dumping duty being less than the provisional and on account of calculating the CVD in terms of Board's circular and in regard to value of goods of Thai origin being lower, he reiterates the findings of the authorities below. 7.In regard to redemption fine ld. DR submits that he has nothing to add in view of the judgments of the Hon'ble Supreme Court cited by the Counsel for the appellant. 8.He submits that in so far as imposition of penalty is concerned, the appellant was not a new importer of the goods. He submits that the appellant had been importing the goods from Thailand; that when anti-dumping duty was levied on goods of Thai origin, the appellant instead of ....