2002 (1) TMI 447

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... Chapter 64 relates to footwear, gaiters and the like and parts of such articles and heading 64.01 covers foot wear and parts thereof. Sub-heading 6401.12 covers "Footwear of retail price not exceeding Rs. 125/- per pair". The appellants claimed assessment of the shoes in question to additional customs duty under heading 6401.12 at Nil rate of duty, upon a declaration that the retail sale price of the shoe was below Rs. 125/- per pair. The Customs authorities accepted the declaration and assessed the goods accordingly. However, subsequently, proceedings were initiated for recovery of duty under Sub-heading 6401.19 i.e. as "other" footwear. Allegation was also made that the short levy was on account of mis-declaration of retail price by the....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....s did not have a retail price declaration on the goods themselves or on the package thereof to the effect that retail price did not exceed Rs. 125/-, they were eligible to be classified under 6401.12, despite the stipulation regarding price declaration in Section 4A of the Central Excise Act. He submitted that the provisions in Section 4A of the Central Excise Act related only to levy of Central Excise duty on goods manufactured in India and not to the levy of additional Customs duty equivalent to Central Excise duty leviable under Section 3 of Tariff Act. 3. As against the above submissions on behalf of the appellant, learned SDR submitted that short-levy of duty in the present case was clear and was liable to be recovered under Se....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ise Act. The learned SDR submitted that recovery of the short-levied duty in these circumstances was not at all dependant on the appellant's declaration regarding retail sale price. The absence of declaration of retail sale price on the shoes or on the packages thereof disqualified these footwear from classification under sub-heading 6401.12 and they had to be classified as "other" footwear. 4. A perusal of the records of the case shows that the shoes under import did not contain price declaration on them or on their packages. Note 2(e) to Chapter 64 makes it clear that only footwear conforming to the requirements of Section 4A of the Central Excise Act, 1944 would be eligible for classification under 6401.12. It is a stipulation un....