9911796707
|
Home
Issues: Interpretation of entry "Dates dry all qualities but excluding seedless and raisins" in Exemption Notification No. 123/92-Cus., dated 1-3-1992.
Comprehensive Analysis: 1. The judgment involves the interpretation of the entry "Dates dry all qualities but excluding seedless and raisins" in Exemption Notification No. 123/92-Cus., dated 1-3-1992. The issue arose when the Assistant Collector of Customs interpreted the entry to include raisins, while the Collector (Appeals) held that raisins were not covered by the entry. The appeals were filed against the decision of the Collector (Appeals) by the Collector of Customs, Bombay. 2. The facts of the case revolve around the import of Chinese Green Raisins by M/s. Vishal S. Chhabria, who were granted clearance without levy of auxiliary duty of Customs under Notification No. 121/92, dated 1-3-1992. However, the Custom House later demanded duty, applying the partially exempted rate under Notification 123/92, dated 1-3-1992, as they believed raisins were covered by the entry at Serial No. 1 of the Table under that Notification. The respondents contended that raisins were not covered by the entry and were eligible for full exemption under Notification 121/92. The Collector (Appeals) agreed with their contention and set aside the Assistant Collector's orders. 3. The appellant Collector argued that the entry in Notification 123/92 covered dry dates of all qualities but excluded the seedless variety. Raisins, being dried grapes and not dates, should not fall under this category. The word "excluding" was interpreted to only exclude the seedless variety of dates, and the word "and" was seen as disjunctive, separating "seedless" and raisins. Therefore, the appellant urged that the order of the Collector (Appeals) be set aside. 4. During the hearing, the Departmental Representative reiterated the submissions, emphasizing that the raisins imported were not sultanas and, therefore, were not covered under Notification 121/92. The Collector (Appeals) decision would result in raisins losing the benefit of partial exemption under Notification 123/92. The Departmental Representative requested the appeal to be allowed and the order-in-appeal to be set aside. 5. The Tribunal analyzed the submissions and the record, concluding that the Collector (Appeals) decision left the respondents in a worse position than before. The Tribunal agreed with the Departmental Representative's argument that sultanas are a variety of raisins eligible for complete exemption under Notification 121/92, while other varieties of raisins, such as the Chinese Green Raisins in question, should be covered under Notification 123/92. The Tribunal found that the exclusion in the entry "Dates dry all qualities but excluding seedless and raisins" only applied to the seedless variety of dates, not to raisins. The judgment was in favor of the appellant, setting aside the order-in-appeal and restoring the Assistant Collector's orders.
|
