9911796707
TMI Blog2003 (6) TMI 373X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... R. Madhiam, JDR, for the Respondent. [Order per : Jeet Ram Kait, Member (T) (Oral)]. This appeal is directed against the Order-in-Appeal No. CAL. 246/2002, dated 23-7-2002 passed by the Commissioner of Customs (Appeals), Kolkata by which the Commissioner has rejected the appeal filed by the appellants herein. 2. After hearing the parties, the operative portion of the order allowing the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... that the goods were predominantly made of leather and he held that the samples of goods do not conform to the standard of outer visible surface area of leather and he ordered for confiscation of the goods with option to redeem the same on payment of fine of Rs. 20,000/- and a penalty of Rs. 5,000/-. On appeal the Commissioner (Appeals) rejected the appeal and hence this appeal. 4. Shri B.N. Chat ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the Project Head, National Leather Development Programme, the percentage of leather used is more than 60 (sixty) and in certain cases it is even more than 82%. In such cases, simply because certain percentage of PVC also has been used, it cannot be said that the goods are not made of leather. In the circumstances he prayed for allowing the appeal. 5. The learned JDR appearing for the Revenue re ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e classifiable as leather goods and not as PVC goods. We also find force in the submission of the appellants that the PVC material were used on the outer surface of the goods as combination as per the instructions of their customers which were supplied free of cost and were cleared on payment of duty and the DEPB benefit claimed by them was only for the leather portion of the goods. This position ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
