Finished leather classification failed where goods lacked protective coating and did not meet the prescribed notification norms.

Export goods qualify for Notification No. 133/2000-Cus. only if they satisfy the prescribed norms and retain the character of finished leather. On the record, the samples examined for the appellants and the department differed, and the later certificate found a total absence of protective coating, so the goods did not meet the finished leather standard. Note 3 to Public Notice No. 3/92-97 was held inapplicable because it addresses only deficiencies in the degree of mechanical operation, not a complete absence of protective coating. The goods also failed to meet the norm for Goat Nappa Upper, so the notification benefit was denied.

---

---

Issues: Whether the exported goods qualified as finished leather so as to obtain the benefit of Notification No. 133/2000-Cus. dated 17-10-2000.

Analysis: The benefit under the notification depended on satisfaction of the norms laid down in the relevant public notice and the goods having the character of finished leather. The material on record showed that the sample examined for the appellants differed from the sample examined at the instance of the department, and the second certificate recorded that the goods did not satisfy the norms for finished leather because there was total absence of protective coating. Note 3 to Public Notice No. 3/92-97 did not assist the appellants, since it dealt only with deficiency or shortfall in the degree of mechanical operation and not with a complete absence of protective coating. The goods also failed to satisfy the norms for the specified category of Goat Nappa Upper.

Conclusion: The goods were not finished leather and the benefit of the notification was rightly denied. The appeals were rejected.

---