TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
1988 (5) TMI 224
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Accordingly the appellants submitted two REP licences and claimed clearance of the imported goods as "packing materials Polypropylene" allowed against product Group 0.1 of Appendix 17 of the Import Export Policy, April, 1985 - March, 1988 and also claimed the benefit of the exemption Notification No. 341-Cus, dated 2-8-1976 under Sr. No. 96 of the Table attached to the said Notification. However the Customs Authorities did not allow the clearance on the ground that the imported goods fall under Appendix 2B of the said Policy and the appellants are not entitled for exemption under Notification No. 341/76, dated 2-8-1976 as amended. As a follow-up action a show cause notice calling upon the appellants to show cause as to why the imported goods be not confiscated and penalty be not imposed was issued. In reply the appellants inter-alia contended that the licence produced by them were valid for the import of subject goods against product Group 0.1 of Appendix 17 of Import Export Policy, 1985-1988 as the imported goods are "packing materials Polypropylene". The appellants further stated that they are entitled for the benefit of exemption Notification No. 341-Cus. However the Additional....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....urther contended that on previous occasions similar goods were allowed to be imported against similar licence and therefore the imported goods should have been allowed in the instant case also and to support his contention he cited the decisions rendered in the case of M/s. Basant Industries v. Collector of Customs, 1987 (12) ECR 84 = 1987 (29) ELT 155 (Tri.); M/s. Jain Exports Pvt. Ltd. v. Collector of Customs-1987 (11) ECR 545 = 1988 (33) ELT 199 and In Re; S.S. Kothari, 1987 (30) ELT 156. In reply Shri L. Chakarborty, learned JDR while supporting the impugned order submitted that the imported goods were covered under Sr. No. 84 'Self Adhesive Tapes of all types' of Appendix 2 Part B of Import and Export Policy, 1985-1988. He further submitted that sub-para (c) of Group 0.1 of Appendix 17 of the Import Export Policy, 1985-1988 against which the appellants claimed the clearance of imported goods does not permit the import of Self Adhesive Coated Jumbo Rolls of Polypropylene. 5. We have considered the arguments and the case law cited by the appellants. Sub-para (c) of Column 4 of Group 0.1 of Appendix 17 of the Import Export Policy, 1985-1988 against which the appellants claimed....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... proposition which is contrary to the intention of the policy. In fact different provisions have been laid down in the policy for the different categories of polymerised products. As regards the party's contention in respect of the description polythelene moulding power" against Product Group 0.1, it may be pointed out that this description only indicates that polythelene in its specified primary form i.e. "moulding powder" is allowed for import and in no other primary form. As against this, polypropylene in all its primary forms like powder, granules, flakes etc. would be allowed. The position remains that no manufactured articles like films/sheets, (whether or not coated with adhesive) would be permitted for import against this entry. It is also noted that the only manufactured article of polypropylene which has been allowed against Product Group 0.1 (which is Incidentally a finished article) is printed polypropylene bag. This only makes it abundantly clear that no other manufactured article of polypropylene is covered by the relevant entry against product Group 0.1. (The party's contention that the coating of (Polypropylene) sheets with adhesive does not take them out of the cat....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ority in releasing such goods. 7. Hence we answer Question No. (i) in the negative and hold that the importation of subject goods was unauthorised. 8. As regards Question No. (ii) : Shri J.S. Agarwal submitted that the learned Additional Collector erred in denying the benefit of Notification No. 341/76-Cus., dated 2-8-1976 on the flimsy ground that all the articles specified in Item Nos. 1 to 11 are finished products ready for use of consumers and therefore the articles intended to be covered by Item No. 12 which reads as 'Others' would also be 'finished articles ready for use'. In reply Shri L.C. Chakarborty, JDR supported the impugned order. 9. We have considered the arguments. Sr. No. 96 of the Table attached to the Notification No. 341/76-Cus., dated 2-8-1976 reads as follows :- TABLE Sl. No. Description of goods Chapter/Heading No. in the First Schedule to the Customs Tariff Act, 1975 (1) (2) (3) 96 Articles made of artificial resin, plastic materials, cellulose esters and ethers: 39 (1) Racket strings (2) Flexiglass boards for Basket Ball (3) Seives ....