1993 (6) TMI 98

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... to the show cause notice have inter alia averred that the exported goods (laces) are covered by the term 'made-up' as described in Note-6 of Chapter XI of BTN; that the goods, though ready for use, were in running lengths as the end use of the intended users was not known to them; that Collector (Appeals) relying on clarification contained in Circular No. 15/77 dated 6-10-1977 issued by the Export Commissioner held that the laces were non-fabric made-up articles and thus covered by sub-serial No. 2702(5) of the extant Drawback Schedule. They accordingly pleaded that the review proceedings should be dropped. 4. An opportunity of personal hearing duly offered on 17-8-1992 was not availed of. The respondents however requested that the case....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... No. 2702(5). Similarly the plea (d) of the Respondent themselves is also without force as permitting goods to be exported under claim of Drawback does not per se entitle the exporter to a claim. 8. The short point, therefore, for consideration is whether 'laces' of running length are made-up articles for the purposes of sub-serial No. 2702(5) of drawback schedule as held by Collector (Appeals) or not. 9. While holding as above Collector (Appeals) has relied upon Circular No. 15/77 dated 6-10-1977 issued by Export Promotion Council and Note 6 of Section XI to the explanatory notes to B.T.N. which define made-up articles. It is felt that reliance on these two sources is not permissible for classification under the drawback schedule in ....