2004 (8) TMI 110

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... 67/2002. The Short facts are that on 2-8-2001 the Settlement Commission passed order on Application Nos. 21/2000 and 56/2000 and directed the appellants to pay import duty and penalty thereon. Against said order, the appellants of these appeals filed separate writ petitions bearing Nos. 2176 and 2202/2001 and when the same petitions were placed for consideration, it appears that on the observation .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... t have examined correctness of the original order passed by the Settlement Commission as earlier writ petitions filed by the appellants were withdrawn. The second ground was that there was no error apparent on the face of the record in the order of Settlement Commission. 4. So far as first ground is concerned, we are clearly of the view that withdrawal of the earlier writ petitions to enable the .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ne the value of imported goods". It has been submitted that while passing the original order and fixing the duty, the Settlement Commission has not taken into consideration value of lowest transaction value of the identical goods out of several transaction values of the identical goods produced before it. Learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the Union of India submitted that from the impugned or .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X