1987 (3) TMI 215 - AT - Central Excise

Zip fasteners not considered embellishments in leather footwear per Tribunal ruling. Functional, not decorative.

The Tribunal held that zip fasteners, despite being used in leather footwear, do not qualify as embellishments for footwear under the exemption ... Classification of goods Issues:Interpretation of exemption notification for zip fasteners used in footwear.Analysis:The case involved determining whether zip fasteners of specified lengths qualify as 'buckles and other embellishments for footwear' under a specific exemption notification for lower duty rates. The appellants argued that zip fasteners are similar to buckles in function and embellishment, supported by evidence from a footwear manufacture textbook, a certificate from the Export Promotion Council, and the argument that zip fasteners serve both functional and decorative purposes in footwear. The consultant highlighted that the notification does not specify use only in the leather industry. However, the Revenue contended that zip fasteners do not qualify as embellishments based on previous tribunal decisions and the essential decorative function requirement. The Revenue emphasized that zip fasteners primarily serve a functional purpose of fastening shoes, unlike embellishments. The larger Bench decision was cited to support the argument that embellishments should have no other function except decoration.The Tribunal analyzed the arguments from both sides and concluded that zip fasteners, while used in leather footwear, do not qualify as embellishments for footwear under the exemption notification. The Tribunal agreed with the Revenue that zip fasteners primarily serve a functional purpose of fastening shoes and lack the essential decorative function required for classification as embellishments. The Tribunal found that the evidence presented by the appellants, including the textbook extracts and certificate, did not sufficiently prove that zip fasteners should be considered embellishments. The Tribunal also noted discrepancies in the certificate provided by the Export Promotion Council. As a result, the benefit of the exemption notification was deemed unavailable for zip fasteners, leading to the rejection of the appeals.