Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

Home Case Index All Cases Customs Customs + AT Customs - 1995 (5) TMI AT This

  • Login
  • Referred In
  • Summary

Forgot password       New User/ Regiser

⇒ Register to get Live Demo



 

1995 (5) TMI 105 - AT - Customs

Issues:
Eligibility of kraft paper bag with inner metallic coating of aluminium for exemption under Notification No. 97/79 for re-export after packing of tea.

Detailed Analysis:

The appeal before the Appellate Tribunal CEGAT, New Delhi involved the determination of the eligibility of a kraft paper bag with an inner metallic coating of aluminum for exemption under Notification No. 97/79. This notification provides total exemption from Customs duty and Additional duty of Customs to containers of durable nature imported for re-export within six months. The Adjudicating authority had denied the exemption, stating that the imported tea sacks made of paper could only be used once, unlike durable containers. Additionally, the importers failed to produce documents to establish their claim for the notification at the time of importation. The authority also rejected the benefit of Notification No. 150/80-Cus. as it covered only printed bags of specific materials, not paper bags.

The lower Appellate Authority, after examining a sample of the tea sack, extended the benefit of Notification No. 97/79, considering the multi-wall paper sack as a durable container since tea was exported in it without additional cartoning or packing. However, the matter was remanded to the Assistant Collector for confirmation of re-export within six weeks. The Importers did not appeal against this part of the decision. The appeal before the Tribunal was filed by the Revenue against the extension of benefits under Notification No. 97/79 by the Collector (Appeals).

During the hearing, the Tribunal considered the arguments presented by both parties. The learned DR for the appellants contended that the notification applied only to large metallic containers for cargo, not tea sacks. However, the Tribunal disagreed, stating that the notification did not specify the type of containers eligible for the exemption. The key requirement was that the tea sacks must be durable and re-exported within six months.

The Tribunal referred to the Concise Oxford Dictionary definition of "container" as a vessel or box designed to hold specific items and "durable" as capable of lasting or remaining useful for a period. It agreed with the respondents' counsel that the tea sacks made of four-ply printed paper with an aluminum inner foil were durable enough to withstand the sea voyage from India, meeting the criteria of durability under Notification No. 97/79.

In a previous case, Dimakusi Tea Co. Ltd. v. Collector of Customs, Calcutta, the Tribunal had considered the durability of containers made of different materials. The Tribunal in that case had extended the benefit of Notification No. 150/80 but not No. 97/79 due to lack of evidence regarding durability. However, in the current case, the Collector had confirmed the durability of the tea sacks, and the department failed to substantiate its claim against their durability. Therefore, the Tribunal upheld the decision of the lower Appellate Authority, confirming the extension of benefits under Notification No. 97/79 and rejecting the Revenue's appeal.

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates