Home
||
Export Import Policy & DGFT matters
|| Customs
matters || Central Excise matters ||
Shipping and Logistics Information
ieport.com - India's
Premier portal on EXIM matters
Circular
No. 241/75/96-CX
dated 3/9/96
F.No. 58/4/96-CX.I
Government of India
Ministry of Finance
Department of Revenue
Central Board of Excise
and Customs, New Delhi
Subject:
Notification No. 30/95-CE dated 16.3.95- Clarification regarding
I am directed to say that a doubt has been raised on the interpretation
of Notification No. 30/95-CE dated 16.3.95 (S.No. 1) regarding exemption
to certain narrow woven fabrics falling within Ch. 58 from Central Excise
duty and/ or additional duty of customs
The Commissioner (Customs), madras has sought to apply the Notification
No. 30/95-CE dated 16.3.95(S.No. 1) only to narrow woven fabrics (having
a width not exceeding 30 cm) not containing elastomeric yarn or rubber
thread on the following varieties only:-
a) Pile
Fabrics
b) Chenile
Fabrics
c) Tufted
Towelling and similar Woven Terry Fabrics
d) Tufted
Textile Fabrics
Plain narrow woven fabrics of variety other than the aforesaid varieties
have been denied the benefit to notification No. 30/95 and subjected to
additional duty of Customs at tariff rates at the time of its import. On
an appeal filed by the party, CEGAT Madras Bench in its order No. 934/1996
dated 25.6.96 has held that the first two items covered in the notification
No. 30/95(S.No.1) i.e. Woven Pile Fabrics & Chenille Fabrics fall under
58.02. After each item there is a coma. Thereafter narrow woven fabrics
are also mentioned, which is mentioned after a coma. Therefore it is clear
that this has to be read as disjunctively as held by Hon'ble Supreme Court
in the case of Shri N.K. Salpekar vs. Sri Sunil Kumar (AIR 1988 SC 1841,
1813 & 1844), Sri A.K. Gopalan vs. State of Madras (AIR 1950 SC 27
& 45) and Sh. Mohd. Shabbir vs. State of Maharashtra (AIR 1979 SC 564
& 565). Therefore the CEGAT has viewed that since there is a coma and
after that coma the narrow Woven Fabrics are mentioned, the same are to
be read disjunctively and the reasoning that narrow woven fabrics ought
of fall in the general clause of the preceding five items cannot be held
to be correct.
The matter has also been further examined by the Board and the Board has
accepted the above said interpretation of Notfn. No. 30/95 given by the
CEGAT.
Sd/
(S.C.Bhatia)
Under Secretary
to the Government of India