ORDER
T.K. Jayaraman, Member (T)
1. This is an appeal filed against the Order-in-Appeal No. 290/2003, dated 4-7-2003 passed by the Commissioner of Customs (Appeals), Bangalore.
2. Brief facts of the case are as follows :-
The appellants are bona fide exporters. They imported goods carrying the description “printed bags (in carton forms).” The goods were cleared by the Customs by granting exemption vide Notification No. 16/2000-Cus., dated 1-3-2000 (Sl. No. 115). After the goods have been cleared, the Revenue proceeded against the appellants for payment of duty on the imported goods on the ground that the said exemption Notification is applicable only for printed bags and not for cartons and sheets. The original authority issued an order confirming the duty to the tune of Rs. 80,124/- under Section 28 of the Customs Act. He held that the exemption is applicable only to printed bags and not for cartons. Hence he confirmed the demand. The Commissioner (Appeals) confirmed the order of the original authority. The appellants were aggrieved over the impugned order of the Commissioner (Appeals). Hence they come before this Tribunal for relief.
2. Shri G. Sampath, ld. Counsel appeared for the appellants and Shri R.N. Viswanath, ld. SDR for the Revenue.
3. Ld. Counsel urged that the appellants are bona fide exporters and they imported only printed bags (cartons type). Hence they are entitled for the benefit of the Notification.
4. Ld. SDR states that the Notifications have to be construed very strictly and since the goods imported are cartons and not printed bags they are not entitled for the exemptions.
5. We have gone through the records carefully. On going through the Bill of Entry we find that the importers have mentioned description of the goods as “PACKING MATERIALS PRINTED BAGS (CARTON TYPE) TOP & BOTTOM (SHEETS OF PRINTED BAGS).” They had also claimed the benefit of the Notification. The customs officers, after examination, have permitted the clearance of the goods without payment of duty. There is no doubt that the imported items are packing materials. The department has not disputed the facts that the importers are bona fide exporters. The appellants have also submitted that these bags have utilized as packing material and exported along with the goods. No sample of the bag has been kept to show that it is not a bag and therefore not entitled for exemption. In this circumstance it would be very difficult for us to hold that the goods are not printed bags, after they have been cleared after due examination. In the interest of just and fair play, we allow the appeal with consequential relief.
(Pronounced and dictated in open Court)