1992 (9) TMI 179

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... 1,42,027.11 and in Appeal No. C-78/89 the same appellants had imported 80 cartons of Staple Pins valuing Rs. 51,646.22. The Adjudicating Authority and the Collector (Appeals), in both the cases, held that the clarification given by the Chief Controller of Imports and Exports, states that against R.E.P. Licences issued for Export Product Group '0', Appendix-17 for the Import-Export Policy, 1985-88, only those Staple Pins are allowed to be imported which are used as an item of embellishment and trimming in the manufacture of export products. But the Stapling Pins which are used as stationery items are not permitted for import against the said Export Product Group: '0'. 3. In that view of the matter, the import of Staple Pins in question ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... E the Custom House was bound by the same. In such circumstances, the import was unauthorised and he accordingly supported the impugned orders appealed against. 7. We have considered the submissions of both sides. In the decision reported in 1988 (37) E.L.T. 44 (Cal.) in the case of Vinod Gupta v. Collector of Customs, their Lordships of the Calcutta High Court at para-38 held as follows:- "38. In my view, having regard to the facts and circumstances of this case, the Customs authorities cannot be allowed to ignore their past practice and to adopt different standard and to take different views at different point of time with regard to the importation of the same commodity. It is their duty to inform the general public who are importin....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....arently covered by the specific entry in Col. 4 of S. No. 0.1 would not be covered by that serial number inasmuch as the imported goods are used as office stationery and not as trimmings and embellishments which are permissible under S. No. 0.1, is not correct in our view. Though the same staple pins may be used as office stationery, no definite finding has been made that the staple pins imported by the appellants cannot be used in packing of the export product i.e. leather goods mentioned in Col. 2 of S. No. D. 2.2. The item, "trimming and embellishment" has a very wide connotation and use of staple pins in closing the polythene packing of export product would also be covered by the said expression.' The point, under the circumstances, ....