1992 (4) TMI 127 - AT - Customs

Summary

Issues:
- Rejection of refund claims by authorities below
- Claim for exemption of imported goods from Additional Duty and Auxiliary Duty
- Interpretation of Notification No. 224/85-Cus. regarding goods for use in Leather Industry

Analysis:
The appellants filed two appeals dissatisfied with the rejection of their refund claims by the authorities below. The common facts in both appeals were that the appellants imported endless felt sleeves, cleared them on duty payment, and later filed refund claims for exemption from Additional Duty and Auxiliary Duty under Notification Nos. 224/85 and 188/86. The Assistant Collector of Customs rejected the claims, stating that the imported goods were meant for Sammying Machine manufacturing, not direct use in the Leather Industry. The Collector of Customs (Appeals) upheld this decision, leading to the present appeals. The main issue was the interpretation of Notification No. 224/85-Cus. exempting goods for use in the Leather Industry. The appellants argued that since Felt Sleeves were listed in the notification and used in Sammying Machines for the Leather Industry, they should qualify for the exemption. The Respondent contended that the goods were not directly used in the Leather Industry but in Sammying Machine manufacturing, thus not eligible for the exemption.

During the arguments, the appellants cited case law and compared the current notification with earlier ones to support their claim for exemption. The Respondent emphasized that the language of the notification clearly stated exemption for goods imported for use in the Leather Industry, which did not align with the appellants' use of the imported goods in Sammying Machine manufacturing. The Respondent highlighted the nature of the imported goods as essential component parts for Sammying Machines, crucial for the Leather Industry, but not directly eligible for the exemption under the notification.

The Tribunal analyzed the submissions and case law presented by both sides. They noted that the language of Notification No. 224/85-Cus. was explicit in granting exemption only for goods imported for use in the Leather Industry. Despite the appellants' argument that Sammying Machines were used in the Leather Industry, the Tribunal ruled that the benefit of the notification could not be extended indirectly to goods not directly eligible. They emphasized strict interpretation of fiscal provisions and rejected the appellants' contention, ultimately dismissing the appeals for lacking merit based on the clear language of the notification and the specific use of the imported goods in Sammying Machine manufacturing, not direct use in the Leather Industry.