It did number take numbere of what had been said about burden, disclosure, cross examination, the error of relying upon a quotation made by one party in a foreign city to another also there and the direction to the Collector to decide the matter on remand in the light of its observations.Instead, the Collector once again relied upon the same quotation given by one party in Singapore to another and that without offering to the appellants the opportunity of cross examining the source, and proceeded to value the imported goods upon that basis.
The appellants again carried the matter to the Tribunal.
