TMI Blog2017 (8) TMI 875X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rder it was mentioned as levy and collection of AD duty at the rates prescribed in N/N. 70/2010-Cus - Held that: - it is clear that continued levy of AD duty at the rate applicable on the date preceding the issue of N/N. 70/2010, dated 25-6-2010 was ordered by the said Bench. The ruling of the said ADD Bench was only followed in the impugned order. However, the wordings has given a different meani ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... three Member Anti-Dumping Bench of the Tribunal set aside the Customs Notification No. 70/2010, dated 25-6-2010 along with the amending Notification 8/2012, dated 16-1-2012 and the matter was remanded to the Designated Authority for a fresh decision. However, the anti-dumping duty was ordered to be continued at the rate as applicable on the date preceding the issue of Notification 70/2010, dated ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... icable on the date preceding the issue of Notification No. 70/2010. Whereas in the impugned order it was mentioned as levy and collection of AD duty at the rates prescribed in Notification No. 70/2010-Cus. It is submitted that it is a clear error apparent on record. In other words, the AD duty applicable at the rate preceding the Notification 70/2010 is only upheld. 2. We have heard both the si ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... substituted. Para 7 will be substituted as below :- In the light of the foregoing analysis, the impugned order is set aside and the matter is remanded back to the Original Authority for a fresh decision on the claims filed by the appellant . 4. Both the miscellaneous applications filed by the appellant are allowed. (Order dictated and pronounced in the open Court) - - TaxTMI - TMITax ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
