1990 (2) TMI 204 - AT - Customs

Summary

Issues:
Interpretation of import policy entries - Base Paper vs. Decorative Paper

Detailed Analysis:

Issue: Interpretation of import policy entries - Base Paper vs. Decorative Paper

The case involved a dispute regarding the classification of imported items as either Base Paper for waxing, impregnating, and coating or Decorative Paper. The appellants, who were manufacturers of laminated sheets, imported items claiming them to be Base Paper falling under entry No. 29 of Appendix 5 of the Import Policy 1983-84. The department, however, contended that the items were Decorative Papers falling under entry No. 129 of Appendix 3. The Additional Collector rejected the clearance under entry 29 of Appendix 5, considering it a generic entry compared to the specific entry of Decorative Paper under Appendix 3. The Additional Collector allowed clearance under Appendix 3 for a limited value and ordered confiscation of the surplus. The appellants challenged this decision, arguing that the imported items met the criteria of Base Paper and should be cleared under Appendix 5.

During adjudication, the Acting Dy. Chief Chemist opined that the imported items were suitable for use as wall or decorative paper based on visual examination. The appellants argued that the special quality of absorption required for impregnation distinguished Base Paper from Decorative Paper, and the items imported possessed this essential quality as confirmed by the Dy. Chief Chemist's report. They contended that even if the items could be classified as Decorative Paper, the specific entry of Base Paper under Appendix 5 should prevail over the generic entry of Decorative Paper under Appendix 3 as per the Policy provisions. The department, however, supported the Additional Collector's decision, stating that commercially known terms should dictate classification.

The tribunal found that the imported items were indeed base paper usable for waxing, impregnation, and coating, as confirmed by the Dy. Chief Chemist's certificate. It noted that the department did not dispute the suitability of the items as base paper. The tribunal disagreed with the Additional Collector's view that Base Paper was a generic term and Decorative Paper a specific item, emphasizing that not all Decorative Papers could serve as Base Paper. It concluded that the items should be classified as Base Paper under Appendix 5, overturning the Additional Collector's decision. The tribunal allowed the appeal, setting aside the order and directing import clearance under Appendix 5 of the Policy.

In summary, the tribunal resolved the issue by interpreting the import policy entries and distinguishing between Base Paper and Decorative Paper based on their essential qualities and the specific provisions of the Policy, ultimately ruling in favor of the appellants and permitting import clearance under the relevant entry in Appendix 5.