- (1.)There is no merit in these appeals. We set out, briefly, as illustrative, the facts of the appeals filed by M/s. L. M. L. Ltd. in the form of a tabular statement. S. No. Date of date of date of date of import bond warehousing clearance from warehouse 1.27.1.1998 17.2.1998 21.2.1998 4.2.1999 2.3.3.1998 20. 3.1998 25.3.1998 19.2.1999 3.3.2.1998 17.2.1998 21.2.1998 4.2.1999 4.22.4.1998 5.5.1998 11.5.1998 25.1.1999 5.3.2.1998 17.2.1998 21.2.1998 4.2.1999 6.22.4.1998 5.5.1998 11.5.1998 5.1.1999
(2.)In the course of the assessment of the relevant Bills of entry, the assistant commissioner of central excise added special additional duty at four per cent on the customs duty leviable on the goods. The appeal of the assessee therefrom was dismissed. The tribunal, in further appeal, upheld the addition based on the judgment of this Court in Kiran spinning Mills v. Collector of Customs [113 E. L. T. 753].
(3.)The contention of the assessee in these appeals against the order of the tribunal is that the judgment in the case of Kiran Spinning Mills is in conflict with those in the cases of collector of Central Excise, Bombay v. Polyset Corporation [115 E. L. T. 41] and Collector of Central Excise, Jaipur v. J. K. Synthetics [120 ELT 54]