2005 (4) TMI 399 - AT - Customs

Summary

Issues:
- Interpretation of the term "Rubber, resin rubber, EVA or crepe sheets for soles and heels" under Notification 23/98-Cus.
- Classification of imported synthetic rubber in primary form as per the exemption criteria.
- Opportunity for traders to provide evidence of goods being meant for use in leather industry.

Interpretation of Notification Term:
The Revenue appealed against the finalization of seven provisional assessments under one common Order-in-Original and Order-in-Appeal, claiming that the term "Rubber, resin rubber, EVA or crepe sheets for soles and heels" should be interpreted to mean "rubber or resin sheets or EVA for soles and heels." The Tribunal found that the word "or" cannot be read as "and" and upheld the original interpretation.

Classification of Imported Synthetic Rubber:
The imported goods were declared as "KNB 35," which was synthetic rubber in primary form. The Revenue argued that this product was not used in the leather industry. The Tribunal referred to previous judgments by the Apex Court and the Bombay High Court, stating that the issue of whether synthetic rubber in primary form would be covered by the exemption needed to be redetermined. Traders were given the opportunity to provide evidence that the imported goods were intended for use in the leather industry.

Opportunity for Traders to Provide Evidence:
The Tribunal allowed the appeals and remanded the case to the original authority for consideration of evidence showing that the imported item was for use in the leather industry. Traders were directed to present the necessary evidence, and the issue was to be determined in accordance with the decisions of the Apex Court and the Bombay High Court. The appeals were allowed on these grounds, providing traders with the opportunity to establish the intended use of the goods in the leather industry.