1987 (2) TMI 382 - AT - Customs

Summary

Issues:
- Import of Rabbit Skin, Raw and collection of countervailing duty
- Application for refund of countervailing duty rejected
- Contention regarding the imposition of Central Excise duty
- Exemption notifications under Rule 8 of the Central Excise Rules

Analysis:
The case involved the import of Rabbit Skin, Raw by M/s. Narang Wool Co., where countervailing duty was collected under Section 3(1) of the CTA, treating the goods under T.I. 68 CET. The company applied for a refund of the duty, which was rejected by the Assistant Collector and subsequent appeals were dismissed by the Collector of Customs (Appeals). The revision petitions were then transferred to the Appellate Tribunal for consideration. The primary issue was the collection of countervailing duty on the imported goods.

During the proceedings, the appellants argued that the imported rabbit skins could not be considered manufactured goods subject to Central Excise duty since they were not produced in India and underwent minimal processing. However, the Tribunal rejected this argument, stating that the goods were exported in a condition that would render them useless if no further processing had taken place. The Tribunal emphasized that the origin of the goods was not a relevant factor for imposing duty under Section 3(1) of the CTA.

Another contention raised was regarding the applicability of exemption notifications under Rule 8 of the Central Excise Rules to the imported goods falling under T.I. 68 CET. The appellants claimed that two exemption notifications, No. 46/81-C.E. and No. 179/77-C.E., should exempt the goods from duty if certain conditions were met. However, the Tribunal held that the exemptions were subject to specific conditions, including not being manufactured in a factory or without the aid of power. The Tribunal found that there was insufficient evidence to prove that the conditions for exemption were met in this case, leading to the rejection of the claim for exemption.

In conclusion, the Tribunal upheld the lower authorities' decisions to reject the claim for exemption from countervailing duty based on the Central Excise notifications. As a result, both appeals were dismissed, and the orders of the lower authorities were upheld.