9911796707
TMI Blog2000 (5) TMI 528X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ds under the Exim Code No. 38249029.80, as held by the Revenue. 2. After hearing the learned Consultant for M/s. Line Writing Aids (P) Ltd., Calcutta and Shri R.K. Roy, learned JDR for the Revenue, the order impugned was set aside and the appeal was allowed. Now we proceed to record the reasons for allowing the appeal. 3. The appellants have imported 3120 dozen type error correction instruments of Japanese origin and filed B/E No. 1432 dated 23-7-1996 for their clearance. On inspection of the representative sample, the same was found to be of a type of white thick pen and marked with the description of the body of the pen Uni Correction Pen , Rolling Ball Metal Tip . A clip was found to be attached with the pen and by pressing the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of the Customs Act, 1962 but gave option to redeem the same on payment of a fine of Rs. 2 lakh and further imposed penalty of Rs. 10,000/-. As he appellants failed to succeed at the first appellate stage, the present appeal has been filed before the Tribunal. 4. Shri B.N. Chattopadhyay, learned Consultant appearing for the appellants, submits that the Commissioner (Appeals) erred in holding that the typing error correcting pens are covered by ITC (HS) No. 38249029.80 as other residual product of the chemical and allied products of an industry of a kind classified as consumer goods . He argues that the impugned goods are known in the trade parlance as stationery articles and not as the products of chemical and allied products . It is ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rious items covered by different headings of the Customs Tariff. As the typing error correction pens are not specifically excluded from the ITC (HS) No. 39261009. 10 as is done in respect of pins, clips and writing instruments , the same shall be appropriately classifiable under 39261009.10. He pleads that even if there is a scope for dispute in the wordings of the Code No. 39261009.10, the goods cannot be confiscated and penalty imposed. 5. Shri R.K. Roy, learned JDR appearing for the Revenue reiterates the reasoning contained in the order impugned. 6. We have carefully considered the arguments advanced from both sides. We are unable to subscribe to the view of the Commissioner (Appeals) that by reason of the goods being classifiabl ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
