TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
1994 (10) TMI 156
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
..... 159/90. 3. At this stage there was no dispute regarding the description, quantity or value of the goods because the material had been correctly declared as synthetic rubber and the small (negligible) difference in quantity has already been condoned by the Collector and there is no dispute regarding value. 4. The Collector has, however, still invoked section 111(m) against them on the ground that they had wrongly claimed the benefit of this exemption notification knowingly as the Butyl rubber had not been used in the manufacture of cycle tubes and tyres which had been exported and with reference to which this importation was being made. 5. First and foremost it was their contention that no misdeclaration was involved and ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....f the Learned Counsel have a strong force. We have perused the bills of entry which gives description of the goods as `synthetic rubber (Exxonbutyl 268)' and we take note of the fact that there is no dispute regarding the correctness of the description, quantity and value at this stage (The minor difference in quantity having been ignored at the original level). All that remains, therefore, is to see whether mere mention of Notification 159/90 and claiming benefit thereof could be construed as mis-declaration in terms of section 111(m) in the circumstances of this case. We observe in this respect that since admittedly the bill of entry described the product as synthetic rubber and since there is no dispute that their advance licence permitt....