Plastic footwear exemption survives incidental non-plastic parts; clarificatory notification and circular support retrospective application.

Footwear that is essentially made of plastic does not lose exemption merely because it contains limited non-plastic components such as buckles, tabs, eyelet stays or insoles. A subsequent clarificatory notification was treated as removing doubts about the scope of the exemption entry, and the Board's circular stated that "footwear made of plastic materials" should be given its ordinary meaning with retrospective effect to past clearances. On that basis, plastic footwear with incidental non-plastic parts remained within the exemption and the corresponding demand and penalty were unsustainable.

---

---

Issues: Whether footwear manufactured with some non-plastic components was entitled to the exemption available to footwear made exclusively of plastic materials under the relevant exemption notification.

Analysis: The exemption entry was explained by a subsequent notification inserted to remove doubts and to clarify that plastic footwear would not lose the benefit merely because certain non-plastic items such as buckles, tabs, eyelet stays or in-soles were present. The Board's circular also clarified that the expression "footwear made of plastic materials" was to receive its normal meaning and that the clarificatory explanation would apply to past clearances as well. On the facts, the footwear was essentially plastic footwear and the presence of limited non-plastic materials did not justify denial of the exemption.

Conclusion: The exemption was admissible to the assessee and the demand and penalty were unsustainable.

---