2002 (12) TMI 338 - AT - Customs

Summary

Issues:
- Interpretation of Customs Notification No. 81/95 regarding the benefit for packing materials.
- Applicability of Apex Court judgment in the case of M/s. Prestige Engineering (I) Ltd.
- Tribunal's consideration of stay orders and waiver granted.
- Commissioner (Appeals) decision to deny benefit based on Apex Court judgment.
- Analysis of the definition of "goods" under the Customs Notification No. 81/95.

Interpretation of Customs Notification No. 81/95:
The judgment involved a dispute regarding the benefit of Customs Notification No. 81/95 for packing materials used in exporting Leather Wallets. The original authority granted the benefit but later denied it based on a defined ground. The notification defines goods to include packing materials, and the benefit was held admissible. However, the Apex Court judgment in the case of M/s. Prestige Engineering (I) Ltd. led to the denial of the benefit for the consignment of packing material. The Commissioner (Appeals) also refused to grant the benefit based on the same judgment, leading to the appeals.

Applicability of Apex Court Judgment:
The Tribunal considered stay orders and concluded that the Apex Court judgment in the case of M/s. Prestige Engineering (I) Ltd. was rendered in a different context and was distinguishable. The Tribunal found that the judgment pertained to a different notification not relevant to the interpretation of Customs Notification No. 81/95. The definition of "goods" under the notification did not restrict the benefit on the import of packing materials, and the judgment was wrongly applied by the Commissioner (Appeals).

Tribunal's Decision and Analysis:
After hearing submissions from both sides, the Tribunal set aside the impugned orders and allowed the appeals. The Tribunal found that the benefit of the notification was applicable to the packing materials in question, and the Apex Court judgment was distinguishable and not applicable to the facts of the case. The Tribunal emphasized that the terms of the notification did not bar or restrict the benefit on the import of packing materials used in manufacturing exported wallets. Therefore, the impugned orders were overturned, and the appeals were allowed based on the interpretation of the Customs Notification No. 81/95.