Home Case Index All Cases Customs Customs + AT Customs - 1998 (11) TMI AT This
Issues:
Classification of imported goods under the Customs Act, 1962 - Whether shave foam and shave gel qualify as shaving creams under the EXIM code. Analysis: The case involved the classification of imported shave foam and shave gel under the Customs Act, 1962. The Department contended that the goods did not meet the description of shaving cream and required a specific license. The importer argued that shave foam and shave gel are known as shaving cream in the market. The Department confiscated the goods and allowed redemption on payment of a fine. The appellant claimed that the goods fell under the EXIM code for shaving cream and could be cleared under a Special Import License (SIL). The appellant's counsel referred to technical literature defining shaving preparations, including shave creams, brushless shave creams, and aerosol shave creams. The counsel argued that the imported products qualified as shaving creams based on these definitions. The Department's representative disagreed, stating that shave foam and shave gel did not meet the criteria for shaving creams under the EXIM code. The Tribunal analyzed the definitions provided in the technical literature and determined that the imported products were indeed shaving creams, classifiable under the EXIM code. The Tribunal emphasized the importance of the common parlance test for classification under the EXIM code. It differentiated between pre-shave and after-shave preparations, noting that the imported products did not fall into these categories. The Tribunal acknowledged the evolving nature of technology and consumer preferences, concluding that the imported products were shaving creams under the relevant EXIM code heading. Consequently, the impugned order was set aside, and the appeal was allowed in favor of the appellant, granting consequential relief. Overall, the judgment clarified the classification of shave foam and shave gel as shaving creams under the Customs Act, 1962, based on the common parlance test and technical definitions provided in relevant literature.
|