2007 (1) TMI 376 - AT - Customs

Summary

Issues:
1. Importability of 'white cardboard' under value-based advance licenses (DEEC).
2. Interpretation of DGFT's clarification on importability of white cardboard.
3. Comparison with previous cases involving similar facts.
4. Validity and applicability of DGFT's clarification to the present case.

Issue 1: Importability of 'white cardboard' under value-based advance licenses (DEEC):
The respondent imported 'cardboard' declared as 'white cardboard' under value-based advance licenses for manufacturing cartons for export. Customs authorities doubted its importability under DEEC scheme due to 'white cardboard' being on the sensitive import list. The Commissioner of Customs allowed clearance under the licenses, leading to the department's appeal.

Issue 2: Interpretation of DGFT's clarification on importability of white cardboard:
A clarification from DGFT stated 'white cardboard' meant cardboard with white color, not importable under licenses for 'cardboard other than ivory board.' The department sought to confiscate the goods based on this. However, the Commissioner held the clarification as an inter-departmental communication, allowing clearance. The appeal questioned the validity of this interpretation.

Issue 3: Comparison with previous cases involving similar facts:
Reference was made to a previous case involving ITC Ltd., where a similar clarification led to non-clearance of white cardboard. However, the Tribunal ruled in favor of ITC Ltd., giving the benefit of doubt to the assessee. The present case's facts were deemed identical to the ITC case, supporting the clearance of goods under DEEC scheme.

Issue 4: Validity and applicability of DGFT's clarification to the present case:
The Tribunal analyzed the validity of DGFT's clarification, which was not accepted in the ITC case. The decision in the ITC case was followed, emphasizing the benefit of doubt to the assessee. The Tribunal dismissed the appeal, sustaining the impugned order and highlighting the need to give precedence to previous decisions where facts align, despite the department's attempts to challenge the clearance based on the DGFT's clarification.