TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
1983 (6) TMI 185
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....-4-1983 before a Bench with a composition different from the present Bench. On that occasion a point arose that the Bill of Entry in this case was in the name of M/s. Liberty Footwear Company and the refund application was also in their name, whereas the appeal to the Appellate Collector and the Revision Application to Government were made by M/s. Oil Dale Trading (P) Ltd. The question, therefore, arose as to whether M/s. Oil Dale Trading (P) Ltd., had a locus standi to file the revision application and to be heard in the matter. The learned Counsel for the appellants sought time for furnishing certain correspondence and material to establish the locus standi of the present appellants. This request was allowed, and an opportunity was also g....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....the high seas by the licensee, M/s. Liberty Footwear Company to M/s. Oil Dale Trading (P) Ltd., the present appellants, and that, although the Bill of Entry was in the name of M/s. Liberty Footwear Company, they had endorsed the Bill of Lading in favour of the appellants and that payment of clearing charges etc., as well as the import duty was made by the present appellants. He, therefore, submitted that the appellants had the necessary locus standi to pursue the matter. 5. In addition, Shri Nankani pointed out that at the initial stage refund applications were filed separately both by M/s. Liberty Footwear Company and the present appellants. In the letter accompanying their refund claim, M/s. Liberty Footwear Company had informed t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ani it is obvious that the goods were subject of a "high seas" sale to the appellants, who had paid the duty, the refund of which now is being claimed. It could have been expected that they would have filed the Bill of Entry in their own name, in which case no doubt regarding their locus standi would have arisen. But even otherwise it is clear that the appellants have cause to be aggrieved by the orders of the authorities below. This case is clearly distinguishable from those which were the subject-matter of the authorities cited by the learned Representative of the Department. Apart from this, when separate claims were filed by the appellants and by M/s. Liberty Footwear Company it was the Department which chose to deal with the claim file....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ents. It has been further stated that petrolatum is also used in many types of polishes and in lubricating greases, rust preventives, and modelling clay. Shri Nankani submitted that it was quite clear from these entries that petrolatum was not itself a grease. He also cited Webster's Third New International Dictionary, where again petrolatum was shown separately from grease, and its uses shown as similar to those listed in the Encyclopaedia Britannica. 9. Shri Nankani placed strong reliance on a Tariff Advice of the Central Board of Excise and Customs (T.A. No. 36/82, dated 13-7-1982) according to which "white petroleum jelly I.P. would merit classification under T.I. 68 of CET". He referred to the technical literature relating to t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... under Item 68 CET. Shri Sundar Rajan asserted that they would not fall under that item. He argued that in order to justify classification under Item 68 the goods should have been covered by a licence from the Drugs Controller of India. He also argued that the appellants had never claimed that the goods were a pharmaceutical product. (Shri Nankani fairly conceded that it was not his case that the goods had been used for pharmaceutical purposes. However, according to him classification under Item 68 did not require that the end use should be for pharmaceutical purposes). Shri Sundar Rajan referred to the endorsement on the Bill of Entry to the effect that the goods were "not medicated or perfumed". According to Brady's "Materials Handbook", ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....erring to "I.P.", that Tariff Advice seems to proceed on the basis that goods of pharmaceutical grade and purity would be taken out of the scope of Item 11A; it does not follow that they must necessarily be used for pharmaceutical purposes. Taken to its logical conclusion, Shri Sundar Rajan's argument would mean that an additional condition should be added to the Board's Tariff Advice that assessment of petroleum under Item 68 will be allowed only where the importers had a licence from the Drugs Controller for manufacturing or importing drugs. We see no justification for importing such a condition into the Board's Tariff Advice. So far as the Customs Laboratory Test Report is concerned, it appears that the question posed to the Laboratory w....