2009 (11) TMI 928 - AT - Customs

Misdeclaration in duty drawback shipping bills - On examination of the consignment it was found to be semi-finished burinishable finished leather as against the declaration that it was finished leather - Held that - in an identical situation in the case of Sri Shanmuga Prima Tannery Vs Commissioner of Customs, Chennai 2003 (9) TMI 785 - CESTAT, CHENNAI , the Bench accepted the contention of the appellants that the leather was finished leather, although a lesser protective coat with dye/pigment was applied - appeal allowed - decided in favor of assessee.

Summary

Issues:
Appeal involving duty drawback shipping bills for export of "burnishable upper finished leather" found to be "semi-finished" as per examination leading to confiscation and penalty. Comparison with previous cases regarding the classification of leather as "finished" in the absence of wax coating and dye.

Analysis:
The judgment by the Appellate Tribunal CESTAT, Chennai, involved two appeals concerning the export of leather goods declared as "burnishable upper finished leather" but found to be "semi-finished" upon examination, leading to confiscation and penalty. The Central Leather Research Institute (CLRI) opined that the samples did not meet the standards for finished leather due to the absence of wax coating and dye. The Tribunal initially set aside the orders, remanding the cases for fresh decisions. However, upon fresh orders upholding the confiscation and penalty, the appellants appealed once more.

During the hearing, the Vice-President referred to a similar case involving Sri Shanmuga Prima Tannery, where the Bench accepted that leather with a lesser protective coat could still be classified as "finished leather." Additionally, the Tribunal cited previous cases like Vijayalakshmi Leathers and Others to set aside confiscation and penalty. The learned DR failed to differentiate the facts of the previous cases from the current one, leading to the application of the same legal principles. Consequently, the Vice-President applied the precedent set by the Sri Shanmuga Primary Tannery case and set aside the impugned orders, allowing both appeals.

In conclusion, the judgment highlighted the importance of consistent legal interpretation in similar cases and emphasized the application of established precedents to ensure fairness and uniformity in decision-making regarding the classification of goods for duty drawback purposes.