TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>PVC/PU Leather Cloths Ruled as Raw Materials, Not Footwear Embellishments; Concessional Duty Denied.</h1> <h3>ASHISH & CO. Versus COLLECTOR OF CUSTOMS, BOMBAY</h3> ASHISH & CO. Versus COLLECTOR OF CUSTOMS, BOMBAY - 1986 (25) E.L.T. 114 (Tribunal) Issues Involved:1. Whether PVC/PU Leather Cloth/PVC Flocking-sheets qualify as 'other embellishments for footwear' under Serial No. 12 of Notification No. 29/79-Cus., dated 10-2-1979.2. Interpretation of the term 'embellishment' and its application to the imported goods.3. The requirement of actual use in the leather industry for claiming concessional duty under the said Notification.Issue-wise Detailed Analysis:1. Qualification of PVC/PU Leather Cloth/PVC Flocking-sheets as 'Other Embellishments for Footwear':The appellants argued that PVC/PU leather cloth/PVC flocking-sheets should be considered as 'other embellishments for footwear' under Serial No. 12 of the Notification No. 29/79-Cus., dated 10-2-1979, which would entitle them to a concessional rate of duty at 40%. The Assistant Collector of Customs and the appellate authority rejected this claim, stating that the imported goods were in running length and not in a form that could be considered an embellishment. The Tribunal, after examining the nature and use of PVC/PU leather cloth/PVC flocking-sheets, concluded that these materials are raw materials for manufacturing footwear and not embellishments. The Tribunal emphasized that the goods must be used in the leather industry as embellishments to qualify for the concessional rate, which was not the case here.2. Interpretation of the Term 'Embellishment':The Tribunal referred to dictionary definitions to interpret the term 'embellishment,' which means to beautify or adorn. The Tribunal noted that an embellishment should be something that decorates or adds beauty to footwear. The goods imported by the appellants, PVC/PU leather cloth/PVC flocking-sheets, were found to be raw materials used in the manufacturing of footwear rather than decorative items. The Tribunal rejected the argument that these materials could be considered embellishments based on a certificate from the Export Promotion Council, finding the certificate ambiguous and not supportive of the appellants' claim.3. Requirement of Actual Use in the Leather Industry:The Tribunal emphasized that the Notification requires the imported goods to be used in the leather industry as embellishments to qualify for the concessional duty. The Tribunal held that mere capability of being used as an embellishment is not sufficient; the goods must be ordinarily used as such in the leather industry. The Tribunal found that the imported PVC/PU leather cloth/PVC flocking-sheets were not ordinarily used as embellishments for footwear. The Tribunal also noted that the burden of proof lies on the appellants to establish their claim for exemption, which they failed to do.Conclusion:The Tribunal concluded that PVC/PU leather cloth/PVC flocking-sheets do not qualify as 'other embellishments for footwear' under Serial No. 12 of the Notification No. 29/79-Cus., dated 10-2-1979. The appeals were dismissed, and the appellants were not entitled to the concessional rate of duty.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
