COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS Vs. RANKA ENTERPRISES

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is a Revenue appeal challenging the legality and correctness of the Order -in -Appeal No. M. Cus. 676/93, dated 21 -7 -1993 by which the Commissioner (Appeals) set aside the order passed by the Asstt. Collector of Customs (Refunds), rejecting the refund claim in respect of "white cardboard, 300 GSM". The AC noted the details from the invoices and the supplier's certificate and observed that it is not possible to know as to whether the cardboard is an uncoated one or not and it is not known as to whether it is for writing purposes as stated by the importer. He also noted that there is no test report to show that the impugned goods contain baggage pulp not less than 75%. He noted that mere declaration of the supplier is not acceptable. He noted that the benefit of notification No. 48/89 -C.E. is available only to paper and not to paperboard and hence the claim was rejected.

(2.) The Commissioner (Appeals) set aside the AC's order without any evidence from the appellants solely on the ground that the item contains less than 75% of bagasse in terms of the certificate issued by the manufacturer.

(3.) REVENUE contends that the benefit of notification in question is available only to paper and not to paperboard and admittedly in terms of documents filed the grammage of the imported item is 300 GSM and it has been declared as white cardboard. The same is not writing paper and the benefit is not available but cardboard.