1999 (8) TMI 441

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....1,10,000/- apart from a penalty of Rs. 20,000/ - under Section 112(a) of the said Act on Shri Rakesh Anand, proprietor of Radhika Steel. The question relates to the correct classification of six items of Porcelain namely, (i) Vase, (ii) Champion Cup, (iii) Peacock Champion Cup, (iv) Gourd Pot, (v) Lamp Stand and (vi) Basket imported by the appellants. 2. The Additional Commissioner of Customs after examining the items held that as far as Vases are concerned, they were no doubt ornamental, but they still retain their original utility value, thus they are fully capable of being used as a Vase. He observed that the same argument would hold good for Porcelain Basket as well. However; as regards three items, namely Champion Cup, Peacock ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... by the Additional Commissioner and the quantum of redemption fine, Commission of Customs (Appeals) however held the ingredients of mens rea are absent when the dispute was only in relation to the classification of items and the allegation did not relate to any mis-declaration or under-valuation. He therefore, held that invoking of penalty was not called for and the same was set aside. 3. Shri J.M. Sharma, Id. Consultant appearing for the appellants submitted that the imported goods made of Porcelain were items of "tableware and kitchen ware and other household articles of Porcelain or Chinaware" importable against Special Import Licence (SIL). They had imported similar items on a trial basis on 7-1-1998 as per Bill of Entry No. 613....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....he decorated articles is clearly subordinate to their ornamental character for e.g. trays molded in relief i.e. carving or molding in which the design stands out from the general surface (with greater, less approiximation to the depth of the object represented) so that their usefulness virtually is nullified. Note (c) stated that Tableware and domestic utensils designed and decorated in such a manner as to impair the usefulness of the article. Note (d) stated that such decorated articles serve the useful purpose less efficiently than their plainer counterparts. Note (e) further stated that in case the classification under 69.13 is ruled out then the articles will be classifiable under Heading 69.11 or 69.12. Ld. Consultant submitted that th....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... The dispute centers around the classification' of six items (i) Vase (ii) Champion Cup (iii) Peacock Champion Cup (iv) Gourd Pot (v) Lamp Stand and (vi) Basket. Appellants seek to classify them under Chapter Heading 6911.10 as Tableware and Kitchenware which are eligible for import under Special Import Licence (SIL). They claim that a previous consignment of the same goods on trial basis had been allowed to be cleared against SIL. However, when they imported another consignment thereof and filed Bill of Entry dated 27-2-1998, the Department had denied them such clearances and the three items, namely Champion Cup, Peacock and Gourd Pot were classified under sub-heading 6913.10 as items of Porcelain or China which did not have the facility o....