V.T. Raghavachari, Member (J)

1. These two appeals were initially heard by a Bench consisting of three members who felt that there were conflicting judgments by different Benches of this Tribunal on the issue arising for determination in these appeals, mainly with reference to the construction of the interpretative rule 2(a) as also on the test of post importation costs in that connection and therefore it would be better if the appeals are heard by a Bench consisting of more than three members in order to arrive at uniformity in the view to be taken on the issue in these appeals. Accordingly the papers were placed before the President who constituted this Bench of five members for hearing the appeals.

2. After the appeals had been posted for hearing before this Bench M/s. Enfield India Ltd. and also M/s. Tata Engineering Locomotive Co. Ltd., both represented by Shri S. Subramanian, Consultant, applied that they may be permitted to participate in the proceedings before us as intervenors since a large number of their cases are also to be heard by this Tribunal in which the issue now before us would be the main issue. After hearing Shri Gujral, the learned counsel for the appella