Skip to content
How to use Judgment tools
  1. Click Tools to open PDF, Print, Tag, Note, Favourite, and CiteSignal.
  2. Use Brief & Ask in the toolbar for the AI Brief and case chat.
  3. Jump to sections with the pills below the help bar.

Electronic Components Vs. Collr. of Customs

Electronic Components vs Collr. of Customs

Type Court Judgment Court Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi Decided Mar 19, 1997
~2 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/10942

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

  • 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
  • Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
  • Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
  • Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account

Citation
Court
Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided On
Subject
Land Acquisition

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Land Acquisition

Key legal issue
Land Acquisition

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Electronic Components

Respondent

Collr. of Customs

Legal References

Reported In
(1997)(92)ELT511TriDel

Excerpt

1. the appellants imported phosphor bronze strips which were cleared in terms of notification no. 231/83-cus., dated 18-8-1983 (serial no. 43).later on a less charge memo was issued alleging short levy of duty. the ground was that the imported goods were of a thickness of 0.13 mm; whereas as per note to chapter 74, the minimum thickness required for goods to be classified as strips was 0.15 mm. after hearing the importers, the assistant collector confirmed the demand. the collector (appeals) upheld the lower orders. hence the present appeal.2. the appellants requested for disposal on merits which we proceed to do after hearing shri k. srivastava, sdr.3. the subject notification provides exemption for phosphor bronze strips falling under chapter 74 of the c.t.a. the definition of strip as occuring in chapter note 2(c) was as follows : "flat-surfaced, wrought products (coiled or not), of which the maximum cross-sectional dimension exceeds 6 millimetres and of which the thickness exceeds 0.15 millimetre but does not exceed one-tenth of the width." it is not denied by the appellants that thickness of the impugned goods was less than 0.15 m.m. it is also not contested that the demand is within time. the only ground in the appeal memorandum is that by practice, conventions and precedents; similar goods have earlier been classified by the custom house as strips. it is also claimed that in the market the goods of thickness lower than 0.15 m.m. are known as strips. we observe that where the tariff itself gives a specification for determination of a classification, there is no requirement to go to the trade parlance. the notification has to be interpreted strictly and words therein construed in terms of entries in tariff. the previous wrong practice by the custom is not a valid ground for claiming relief.we find no merits in this appeal and dismiss the same.

Full Judgment

1. The appellants imported Phosphor Bronze Strips which were cleared in terms of Notification No. 231/83-Cus., dated 18-8-1983 (serial No. 43).

Later on a less charge memo was issued alleging short levy of duty. The ground was that the imported goods were of a thickness of 0.13 mm; whereas as per Note to Chapter 74, the minimum thickness required for goods to be classified as strips was 0.15 mm. After hearing the importers, the Assistant Collector confirmed the demand. The Collector (Appeals) upheld the lower orders. Hence the present appeal.

2. The appellants requested for disposal on merits which we proceed to do after hearing Shri K. Srivastava, SDR.3. The subject notification provides exemption for Phosphor Bronze Strips falling under Chapter 74 of the C.T.A. The definition of strip as occuring in Chapter Note 2(c) was as follows : "flat-surfaced, wrought products (coiled or not), of which the maximum cross-sectional dimension exceeds 6 millimetres and of which the thickness exceeds 0.15 millimetre but does not exceed one-tenth of the width." It is not denied by the appellants that thickness of the impugned goods was less than 0.15 m.m. It is also not contested that the demand is within time. The only ground in the appeal memorandum is that by practice, conventions and precedents; similar goods have earlier been classified by the Custom House as strips. It is also claimed that in the market the goods of thickness lower than 0.15 m.m. are known as strips. We observe that where the Tariff itself gives a specification for determination of a classification, there is no requirement to go to the trade parlance. The notification has to be interpreted strictly and words therein construed in terms of entries in Tariff. The previous wrong practice by the Custom is not a valid ground for claiming relief.

We find no merits in this appeal and dismiss the same.

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial