2011 (6) TMI 573 - CGOVT - Customs

Revision Application classification - Girls Trousers or Legging - claimed drawback rate at 8.80% of FOB by classifying them under drawback schedule Sl. No. 6104. However the lower authority held the said goods as Legging and classified the goods under DBK schedule 640699 and released drawback only @ 1.00% on the FOB value Held that - Government takes up this case matter with the basic objection as being true and substantial i.e. whatever goods were exported were not conforming to normal trousers but were definitely of other particular category which the examining and exporting officer found as Leggings but the appellate authorities inferred the same as tight-fitting stretchy single piece knitted garment more akin to tights leggings eligible for DBK under S.S. No. 611507. The applicant has not put forth any new ground in the Revision Application. The grounds taken in Revision Application are same as the ground of appeal before Commissioner (Appeals). goods are rightly classified under DBK S.S. T. No. 611507-irrespective of the export garment being unisex or not. Government finds no reasons/ground to interfere in the same. Government therefore uphold the impugned Order-in-Appeal for being the same as perfectly legal and proper. Revision Application is thus rejected

Summary

Issues:
Classification of exported goods under DBK schedule, Distinction between different tariff schedules, Content of exported goods for classification.

Classification of exported goods under DBK schedule:
The Revision Application was filed against the Order-in-Appeal, challenging the classification of exported goods as "Leggings" under DBK schedule 640699 instead of "Girls Trousers" under schedule 6104. The applicant argued that the goods were specific to a particular sex and should be classified as unisex under Chapter 6115. They contended that the garments exported were "trousers" made of 96% Cotton and 4% Elasthane, falling under the category of goods made out of "Cotton" according to the recent Drawback Schedule. The applicant sought to set aside the Order-in-Appeal and have their goods classified under DBK schedule 6104 01 01.

Distinction between different tariff schedules:
The applicant further argued that there is a clear distinction between tariff schedules 6103, 6104, and 6115. They emphasized that the goods exported were Girls' Trousers, which should be classified under 6104. The Commissioner (Appeals) acknowledged this view based on the observation of the samples provided. The applicant contended that even though the garments were tight-fitting trousers, they should still be classified as "trousers" under 6104 and not under 6115. The applicant provided detailed references from the Harmonized System of Nomenclature (HSN) to support their argument.

Content of exported goods for classification:
The applicant highlighted that the exported goods were made of 96% Cotton and 4% Elasthane, meeting the criteria for classification under DBK schedule 6104 01 01 as goods made of "Cotton." They referenced a circular clarifying the classification of items based on fiber content, stating that goods with 85% or more Cotton should be classified as such. The applicant argued that the Order-in-Appeal classifying their goods under 611507 was incorrect. Despite the arguments presented by the applicant, the Government upheld the Order-in-Appeal, stating that the goods were rightly classified under DBK S.S. T. No. 611507, as determined by the Commissioner (Appeals).

In conclusion, the Revision Application was rejected for lacking merit, and the Government upheld the Order-in-Appeal as legally sound and appropriate based on the detailed examination and reasoning provided by the Commissioner (Appeals).