{"id":101013,"date":"1984-07-23T00:00:00","date_gmt":"1984-07-22T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/microna-industries-vs-collector-of-customs-on-23-july-1984"},"modified":"2018-10-19T16:22:54","modified_gmt":"2018-10-19T10:52:54","slug":"microna-industries-vs-collector-of-customs-on-23-july-1984","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/microna-industries-vs-collector-of-customs-on-23-july-1984","title":{"rendered":"Microna Industries vs Collector Of Customs on 23 July, 1984"},"content":{"rendered":"
Customs, Excise and Gold Tribunal – Mumbai<\/div>\n
Microna Industries vs Collector Of Customs on 23 July, 1984<\/div>\n
Equivalent citations: 1987 (31) ELT 126 Tri Mumbai<\/div>\n<\/p>\n
<\/pre>\n
ORDER<\/p>\n
 D.N. Lal, Member (T)<\/p>\n
1. The present appeal is directed against Order No. S\/49-7\/84L dated 7-3-84 passed by the Collector of Customs (Appeals), Bombay.\n<\/p>\n
2.     Briefly,   the  facts of the  case are  that  the appellants imported two consignments of tissue paper valued at Rs. 43,979\/- and Rs. 42,935\/-(cif)  and  claimed  clearance of the same against Appendix  10(1) of the April 1982 – March 1983 Import and Export Policy. By virtue of this provision of the  Policy,   the appellants  claimed that the goods were covered by the O.G.L.   The lower authorities, however, held that the goods were not covered by the O.G.L. as claimed by the appellants, and after issuing a  show  cause  notice  the  case  was  adjudicated  by  the  Deputy  Collector of   Customs,   Bombay.  The   Deputy   Collector  after hearing  the  appellants held that the two consignments in question were not covered by the O.G.L. and   ordered  confiscation  of   the  same.  However,   in  lieu   of   redemption of   the   goods,   the   Deputy   Collector  gave  the   appellants  the  option  of redeeming the two consignments on a fine of Rs. 44,000\/- and Rs. 43,000\/-, respectively.   Aggrieved   with  the   Deputy   Collector’s  order  the  appellants moved the Collector (Appeals) Bombay. The said Collector vide his order dated   7-3-1984   upheld   the   order   of   the   Deputy   Collector   and   rejected the appeal.  It  is against  the  impugned order dated 7-3-84 passed by the Collector (Appeals) that the matter has come up before us for consideration.\n<\/p>\n
3.     Shri   Balani,   the   learned   counsel   for   the   appellants   submitted that  the  appellants  were  Actual Users  and  registered with  the  D.G.T.D. to    manufacture   leather   footwear,    Briefcases   and   Suitcases.    According to him, provisions of Appendix  10(1) of AM 83 read with Condition No. 17 On page 126 of the said Policy, the goods imported by the appellants qualified  to be   imported under  the  O.G.L.  He  submitted  that  the  goods  were in the nature of  raw  materials and consumables and, broadly  interpreted, ‘inputs’   for   the   manufacture   of   leather   footwear.   Further,   tissue  paper is used in making patterns for Moccasions which is a special type of leather footwear. For this purpose, he relied on certain extracts from the Publication captioned “The Art of  Working with Leather” by Steven  M.  Edwards (Chapter   V).   The   learned   Counsel   thereafter   made   several   alternative pleas  in  support   of   his  contention  that   the  goods  were  covered  by  the O.G.L.\n<\/p>\n
4.     Appendix  10(1) refers to raw materials, components and consumables. List 8 of  Appendix  10 shows Kraft\/Tissue Paper as one of the items to be allowed under the O.G.L. subject to Actual User conditions. According to the learned counsel, the expression “raw material” had not been defined in  the  ITC  Policy.   As  the  goods  in question were ultimately  required to be used in the manufacture of leather footwear these could, broadly speaking, be treated as raw materials for leather footwear.\n<\/p>\n
5.     Alternatively,   the   goods   could   be   considered   as   “consumables” because these  were  used in the manufacture of  leather footwear for the purpose of wrapping. Tissue paper can be treated as a consumable article in terms of the definition of the said expression given in paragraph 5(12) of  Chapter  2 of  the  A.M.  83 Policy. The expression has been defined as follows :- “Consumable  means  any   item  which  participates  or  is  required in  a manufacturing process; but  does not form  part of  the end product”. The learned counsel submitted that tissue paper is used for wrapping purposes   and   is   therefore   required   in   the   manufacturing  process  of   leather footwear.   At   the  same  time,  being   a  packing   material,  strictly   it  does not form part of the end product, namely, leather footwear.\n<\/p>\n
6.     It   was   urged   that   according   to   information   available   with   the appellants, tissue paper was used in the soles of leather footwear to give a ‘cushioning’ or ‘softening’ effect. However, the learned counsel conceded that   there   was   no   technical   authority   in   support   of   this.   Nonetheless, the  appellants had  produced  before  the  Collector (Appeals),  a sample  of the piece of  leather footwear to show  that tissue paper was used  in the manufacture   of   leather   footwear.   The   Collector   (Appeals)   had   however brushed   aside   this   important   piece   of   evidence   without   advancing   any cogent  reasons. It was open to the Collector (Appeals)  to have a sample cut  to  satisfy  himself  whether  tissue  paper  had  been  used  in  the layers of   the  footwear.   By   not  doing   so,   an  important  piece  of   evidence  had been discarded without any justification.\n<\/p>\n
7.     Attacking   the   Appellate   Order   as  a  whole,   the   learned  counsel maintained  that  the   said  order   suffered  from  various  infirmities.  It was not   a   speaking   order,   the   learned   Collector   had   listed   out  the  various submissions in paragraph 4 of his order but did not discuss them in a well-reasoned   manner.   Since   he   gave   findings   without   proper   reasonings   the order was not  in compliance with the principles of natural justice. It was not   disputed   that   the   appellants  were   actual   users  and  were   registered as   such   to   manufacture   leather   footwear,  briefcases  and  suitcases.  The imported   goods   were   covered   under   the   O.G.L.   because   these   were   in the   nature  of   ‘raw   materials’,   ‘consumables’   and   ‘inputs’  for  the  leather footwear industry.\n<\/p>\n
8.     The   learned   counsel   submitted   that   the   lower   authorities   had discarded their valid pleas and taken harsh action against them by confiscating   the   goods   and   pitching   the   redemption   fine   approximately   equal to the value of the goods. It was submitted that it was very unusual to levy fine of cent per cent level on goods covered by the O.G.L. He maintained that orders passed by the lower authorities were not in conformity with law and therefore deserved to be set aside.\n<\/p>\n
9.     Shri  Jain, the learned Representative of the Respondent referred to the various relevant documents and orders passed by the Deputy Collector   and   the   Collector   (Appeals).   Shri   Jain   submitted   that   although  the expression “raw  material”  had not been defined in the Policy, nonetheless, the expression was well understood in the commercial circles. A raw material  becomes  a  part  and  parcel   of   the  finished  product.  In  the  case  of the   appellants,   the  plea taken before  the  adjudicating  authority  was  that the tissue paper had been imported for wrapping purposes; wrapping paper cannot be treated as a raw material for the manufacture of leather footwear. He described as “misconceived” the argument of the appellants that without primary packing an article cannot be treated as fully manufactured. This concept supported by the Supreme Court’s judgment reported in the 1983 E.L.T. 1896 (S.C.) was relevant in the context of valuation of excisable goods and had no bearing in the case of the appellants. The question for consideration before us is whether tissue paper when used for packing leather footwear could be treated as ‘raw material as understood in the trade circles. He submitted that the reply was clearly in the negative.\n<\/p>\n
10.   Regarding   the   contention  of   Shri   Balani   that   the   goods  could be   treated   as   ‘consumables’,  Shri  Jain  submitted  that  only  such  goods could be  treated as “consumables’ which are required in a manufacturing process but do not form  part of  the end product, e.g. catalysts used in the  manufacture  of  Vanaspati.  Tissue  paper  was  not  used  in the manufacturing process of  leather footwear and could hot therefore be treated as   ‘consumables’.  The  averment  that  tissue  paper  was used  to  provide layers for cushioning in the leather footwear had not been supported by any technical authority. Further, this plea was not taken by the appellants before the  Deputy Collector before whom the only ground taken was that the tissue paper was to be used for the purpose of wrapping the footwear. In any event, the learned Collector (Appeals) had given his finding after seeing the sample. Shri Jain stressed that the appellants had been quite inconsistent in their stand before the lower authorities. At one stage the goods were described as being ‘wrapping material’. This ground was shifted and it was contended that the goods were consumables. Later, these were sought  to  be   treated  as   ‘inputs’.  This  only  showed  that  the  appellants were   interested   in  getting  the goods  covered under  the  O.G.L.  without any regard to consistency or legal support. For instance, it was submitted that  tissue  paper  finds  use in the  manufacture of  leather garments and Moccasins.   The   actual  position,  however,  was  that  the  appellants  were not   manufacturing either.  I.T.C. Policy  in the case  of  the actual  users has  to  be  applied  strictly.  Instead  of  supporting  their case on concrete evidence    of  tissue paper being used by  them  in the  leather footwear, the appellants were putting forth pleas of ‘possible uses’. The lower authorities  were,   therefore,  fully  justified  in  rejecting  the   appellant’s  claim that use of   tissue paper  in  Moccasins could be  deemed to be applicable to other  footwear  also.  The  importation of the goods by  the appellants under  the   O.G.L.  was  in clear  violation of  the  I.T.C.  Policy  and  their appeal deserved to be dismissed. Referring to the quantum  of fine, Shri Jain submitted that it was the usual practice to pitch the same keeping in view the approximate margin of profit available to the goods in question.\n<\/p>\n
11.   We  have heard both the parties at length. The narrow question which falls for our consideration   is whether the tissue paper of the specifications  imported  by   the  appellants  falls  within the  purview  of  Item   1 of Appendix  10. As mentioned earlier, the said item covers raw materials, components and consumables. Shri Balani straightaway conceded that tissue paper could not be treated as a ‘component’. The expression raw material is  not defined in the Policy Book but in trade and manufacturing circles there is hardly any ambiguity about what is meant by the expression ‘raw material’. It is the admitted position that tissue paper is used as a wrapping material   for   leather   footwear.   However,   wrapping   or   packing   material per  se  cannot be treated as  ‘raw  materials’.  Shri Jain’s submission that reliance on the Supreme Court’s decision does, not advance the appellant’s case is, therefore, correct. The plea to treat the tissue paper as ‘consumables’   fails   because   of   the   clear   definition   of   expression   given   in   the Policy Itself. This definition of ‘consumables’ as given in the Policy is somewhat restrictive qua its popular and trade meaning but in deciding the present appeal we have necessarily to follow the definition given in the said Policy. Tissue paper does not fall within the ambit of ‘consumables’ for the reasons put forth by Shri Jain. We fully endorse his reasoning in this behalf.\n<\/p>\n
12.   There is a reference in the records to certain concessions enjoyed by tissue paper when used by the leather industry in I.T.C. Policy in some previous, years. We do not see any relevance to this fact in the present case.   13.   We are also not much impressed by the argument of Shri Balani that due cognisance was not taken by the Collector (Appeals) of the sample produced before him. In the first instance, the Collector has made a specific mention  that  he  had  rejected the  appellant’s contention after  inspecting the sample. Secondly,  this plea was not  taken at the earlier stages and appears to us to have been adopted by the appellants as an after thought. Lastly, no technical literature has been shown to us indicating that tissue paper  is used  in  the  leather  footwear  of   the  types being manufactured by the appellants.\n<\/p>\n
14. Grievance has been made that the fine in lieu Of confiscation is high. We were told by the learned S.D.R. that the redemption fine is fixed keeping in view the margin of profit pertaining to the goods in question. Since this is the usual practice, we do not see any force in the contention of the appellants that the lower authorities have fixed the fine at an excessive level.\n<\/p>\n
15. In the result, we reject the various contentions made by the appellants, uphold the impugned order dated 7-3-1984 and dismiss the appeal.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Customs, Excise and Gold Tribunal – Mumbai Microna Industries vs Collector Of Customs on 23 July, 1984 Equivalent citations: 1987 (31) ELT 126 Tri Mumbai ORDER D.N. Lal, Member (T) 1. The present appeal is directed against Order No. S\/49-7\/84L dated 7-3-84 passed by the Collector of Customs (Appeals), Bombay. 2. Briefly, the facts of […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_lmt_disableupdate":"","_lmt_disable":"","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[1],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-101013","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-judgements"],"yoast_head":"\nMicrona Industries vs Collector Of Customs on 23 July, 1984 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/microna-industries-vs-collector-of-customs-on-23-july-1984\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Microna Industries vs Collector Of Customs on 23 July, 1984 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/microna-industries-vs-collector-of-customs-on-23-july-1984\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"1984-07-22T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2018-10-19T10:52:54+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:creator\" content=\"@legaliadmin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:site\" content=\"@Legal_india\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"10 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/microna-industries-vs-collector-of-customs-on-23-july-1984#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/microna-industries-vs-collector-of-customs-on-23-july-1984\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Microna Industries vs Collector Of Customs on 23 July, 1984\",\"datePublished\":\"1984-07-22T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-10-19T10:52:54+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/microna-industries-vs-collector-of-customs-on-23-july-1984\"},\"wordCount\":2014,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"Judgements\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/microna-industries-vs-collector-of-customs-on-23-july-1984#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/microna-industries-vs-collector-of-customs-on-23-july-1984\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/microna-industries-vs-collector-of-customs-on-23-july-1984\",\"name\":\"Microna Industries vs Collector Of Customs on 23 July, 1984 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"1984-07-22T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-10-19T10:52:54+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/microna-industries-vs-collector-of-customs-on-23-july-1984#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/microna-industries-vs-collector-of-customs-on-23-july-1984\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/microna-industries-vs-collector-of-customs-on-23-july-1984#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Microna Industries vs Collector Of Customs on 23 July, 1984\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"name\":\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"description\":\"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"alternateName\":\"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"alternateName\":\"Legal India\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"width\":512,\"height\":512,\"caption\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.facebook.com\\\/LegalindiaCom\\\/\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/Legal_india\"]},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\",\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Legal India Admin\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/legaliadmin\"],\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/author\\\/legal-india-admin\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Microna Industries vs Collector Of Customs on 23 July, 1984 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/microna-industries-vs-collector-of-customs-on-23-july-1984","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Microna Industries vs Collector Of Customs on 23 July, 1984 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/microna-industries-vs-collector-of-customs-on-23-july-1984","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"1984-07-22T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2018-10-19T10:52:54+00:00","og_image":[{"width":512,"height":512,"url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Legal India Admin","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_creator":"@legaliadmin","twitter_site":"@Legal_india","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Legal India Admin","Est. reading time":"10 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/microna-industries-vs-collector-of-customs-on-23-july-1984#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/microna-industries-vs-collector-of-customs-on-23-july-1984"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Microna Industries vs Collector Of Customs on 23 July, 1984","datePublished":"1984-07-22T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-10-19T10:52:54+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/microna-industries-vs-collector-of-customs-on-23-july-1984"},"wordCount":2014,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["Judgements"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/microna-industries-vs-collector-of-customs-on-23-july-1984#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/microna-industries-vs-collector-of-customs-on-23-july-1984","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/microna-industries-vs-collector-of-customs-on-23-july-1984","name":"Microna Industries vs Collector Of Customs on 23 July, 1984 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"1984-07-22T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-10-19T10:52:54+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/microna-industries-vs-collector-of-customs-on-23-july-1984#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/microna-industries-vs-collector-of-customs-on-23-july-1984"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/microna-industries-vs-collector-of-customs-on-23-july-1984#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Microna Industries vs Collector Of Customs on 23 July, 1984"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","description":"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"alternateName":"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization","name":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","alternateName":"Legal India","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","width":512,"height":512,"caption":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","https:\/\/x.com\/Legal_india"]},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea","name":"Legal India Admin","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Legal India Admin"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com","https:\/\/x.com\/legaliadmin"],"url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/author\/legal-india-admin"}]}},"modified_by":null,"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_likes_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/101013","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=101013"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/101013\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=101013"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=101013"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=101013"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}