Just a moment...

Report
ReportReport
Welcome to TaxTMI

We're migrating from taxmanagementindia.com to taxtmi.com and wish to make this transition convenient for you. We welcome your feedback and suggestions. Please report any errors you encounter so we can address them promptly.

Bars
Logo TaxTMI
>
×

By creating an account you can:

Report an Error
Type of Error :
Please tell us about the error :
Min 15 characters0/2000
TMI Blog
Home /

2004 (7) TMI 403

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... Rs. 18,000/- and imposing a penalty of Rs. 2,000/- on the respondents under Section 114 of the Act. The original authority had taken the view that the respondents' export consignment of 'Heelgrip Goat Suede Lining Leather' required a specific licence in terms of Sl. No. 10(VII) (2) of Para 159 of the Export and Import Policy 1992-97. As the export of the goods was attempted without licence, the said authority ordered confiscation of the goods and imposed penalty on the exporter as above. In the appeal filed by the party against the order of the original authority, the Commissioner (Appeals) took note of ITC (HS) Code 4102 and applied the same to the subject goods. As per this entry/code, 'finished leather, all kinds' were freely exportable....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....o case that the goods in question is not finished leather. His argument is that the goods, at the material time, was covered by the specific entry ITC (HS) Code 4104, as per which lining leathers namely "lining suede from goat/kid/lamb/ sheep skins" were restricted items and any export thereof was permissible only under a licence. It is the DR's contention that, where the goods are covered apparently by two entries, one general and the other specific, the coverage under the specific entry should prevail. Ld. Counsel opposes these arguments and submits that, as per the EXIM Policy, those lining leathers which were processed in the manner laid down by the DGFT from time to time were to be included within the definition of "finished leathers".....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... 162 of the EXIM Policy 1992-97. He wants to have the goods placed under Para 159. Even if it be assumed that Para 159 is relevant, the appellant has to establish that this para, at the relevant time, provided an entry which exclusively covered finished leathers. The DR has sought to classify the goods under Sl. No. 10 (VII) (2) in the Table annexed to Para 159 ibid. Item No. 10 is captioned 'Hides and Skins'. Some of the sub-items are various animal skins and some others are various leathers. The scheme of Item No. 10 makes it clear that it encompasses both finished and raw/unfinished leathers. The specific item canvassed by the DR reads "lining leathers namely, lining suede from goat, kid, lamb and sheep skins". We are unable to read this....