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

TMI Blog

Home

1998 (9) TMI 285

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... oods under Chapter sub-heading 6603.90 and seeking clearances under OGL. Two Bills of Entry were presented on 13-11-1996 and other two Bills of Entry were presented on 3-1-1997. Two show cause notices were issued to the appellant proposing classification of goods under Chapter sub-heading 6307.90, in which case the import would requires specific licence and proposing confiscation of the goods and imposition of penalty, since the appellant did not possess any specific licence. Though the appellant resisted the notices, the Commissioner of Customs, Bangalore, passed two separate orders confirming the proposals in the notices and confiscating the goods, allowing redemption on payment of fine of Rs. 3.5 lacs in respect of the consignments cover .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... e articles, attracting Chapter Heading 63.07 4. Chapter 66 of the Tariff with Umbrellas, sun-umbrellas, walking-sticks, seat-sticks, whips, riding-crops and parts thereof". Heading 66.01 takes in Umbrellas and sub-umbrellas . Heading 66.02 takes in walking-sticks, seat-sticks, whips etc. Heading 66.03 takes in parts, trimmings and accessories of articles of Heading Nos. 66.01 to 66.02. Sub-heading 10 relates to Handles and knobs . Sub heading 20 relates to Umbrella frames, including frames mounted on shafts . Sub-heading 90 takes in Other . It is significant to note that parts, trimmings and accessories are specifically referred to in Heading No. 66.03 and Heading 66.01 takes in also parts of umbrellas other than textile materials .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... n Customs Tariff. We also find that Chapter Notes in the Chapter 66 of Indian Customs Tariff are identical to HSN Chapter Notes. 7. The follwoing Explanatory Note occurs below HSN Chapter Heading 66.03 :- This heading excludes parts, trimmings and accessories of textile materials and covers, tassels, thongs, umbrella cases and the like of any material; these are classified separately even when presented with, but not fitted to, umbrellas, sun-umbrellas, walking-sticks etc. (see Note 2 to this Chapter). With these exceptions, the heading covers identifiable parts, fittings and accessories for articles of Heading No. 66.01 or 66.02". The above Note while referring to parts `when presented with, but not fitted to state Parts even whe .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... mpugned order. In reply to the show cause notices, appellant stated that for the past several years, appellant as well as other umbrella manufacturers have been regularly importing identical goods for past several years, classifying the same under Heading 6603.90 and the same has been in the past regularly accepted by the Customs authorities and the Bills of Entry have been duly assessed accepting the classification and the revenue has taken a contrary view only since December, 1996. Supply orders in these cases had been issued long prior to December, 1996 and the goods had been received only in November, 1996. In reply, it was furhter stated that in view of the consistent practice of classifying under the Chapter Heading 66.03, appellant h .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... he imports under OGL. The import policy was also amended within a few months to enable import of these goods under OGL. Having regard to all these circumstances, there can be no doubt in importing these goods wihout specific licence, Appellant was acting entirely bona fide and without any intention to contravene the law in any manner. 9. In these circumstances, we are of the opinion, that the Commisioner should have refrained from confiscating the goods or imposing penalty. We find a similar view taken by the Tribunal in Radhey Shyam Ratanlal v. Collector of Customs reported in 1994 (72) E.L.T. 910 (Tribunal), and Ingersoll Rand (India) Ltd. v. Collector of Customs reported in 1989 (39) E.L.T. 454 (Tribunal) and other cases. 10. For th .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates