2011 (8) TMI 694

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... for the Bench):     All the four appeals are being disposed of by a common order as the  issue involved is identical.   A very short dispute of classification of goods imported by the appellants is involved. 2. As per facts on record, the appellants have imported 'Omni Flow computers' by classifying the same under heading 9026 1090 under a concessional  rat .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... e basis for adopting the different classification from the previous one. Inspite of such a request, no  appealable orders were passed by the proper officer thus compelling the appellants to file an appeal against the assessed Bills of entry. The appeals filed by the appellants  stand rejected by the Commissioner (Appeals).  Hence, the present appeal. 4.  The appellant's griev .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... uest  to set aside the  impugned order and remand the matter to original authority is being made. 5. Learned DR appearing for the revenue agrees that speaking order should  have been passed by the original  adjudicating authority  as requested for  by the appellants but submits that the appellants were given a proper opportunity to put forth their defence by Commiss .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ected. " 7. As is clear from the above, there is no discussion as to how the goods imported by the appellants fit into the said Chapter  Note. We also note that other pleas advanced by the appellants have not been discussed and considered by the appellate authority.   As such, we agree with the learned advocate that the impugned order passed by the Commissioner (Appeals) is to&nbs .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X