Home
» Indian Exim Policy »
Export Duty / Cess » Departmental
Clarifications & Case Laws DEPARTMENTAL
CLARIFICATION
Bridge Mica [Heading 8 of the Export Schedule] under
Notification No. 87/85-Cus., dated 17-3-1985 – Scope of the
Explanation. – (1) The word ‘and’ appearing in the
explanation to the Notification 87/85, dated 17-3-1985, between the
words ‘area’ and ‘of’ should be read as ‘or’.
Accordingly, Bridge Mica of less that 1.75 sq.inch in area of a stained
first and inferior quality in sizes below number 5 are eligible for
exemption under Customs Notification No. 87/85, dated 17-3-1985.
(2) Since the Notification does not envisage any tolerance limit no
tolerance limit is available with regard to oversized mica blocks. –
Madras Customs Public Notice No. 97/88, dated 25-4-1988.
CASE LAW – EXPORT TARIFF
Black Pepper and Black Pepper Powder (Ground Black Pepper) are two
different commodities. – Collector v. Herbal Isolates (P) Ltd. –
1994 (74) E.L.T. 929 (Tribunal).
Cotton Linters is not raw cotton and, therefore, not liable to duty on
export. – Phulchand & Sons v. Collector – 1984 (18) E.L.T.
49 (Tribunal).
Tapioca Chips is no ‘animal feed’ liable to export duty under
Heading 21 of the Second Schedule to Customs Tariff Act. – Cougar
International Pvt. Ltd. V. Collector – 1984 (16) E.L.T. 310
(Tribunal).
Oil Cake. – Solvent extracted oil cake has not been treated for
removal of toxic Hexane used for solvent extraction and, is deleterious
to the health of animals. It cannot be treated as "animal feed"
falling under Heading 21, Exp. – Collector v. Surendra Cotton Oil
Mills & Fertiliser Co. – 1989 (39) E.L.T. 422 (Tribunal).
Animal Feed. – The term "animal feed" is not the
description of any particular commodity. Tapioca chips in general is not
animal feed and is not, therefore, classifiable under Heading 21 and
charged to export duty. – Cougar International Pvt. Ltd. v.
Collector – 1984 (16) E.L.T. 310 (Tribunal).
‘Animal feed’ to include animal feed supplements. –
Deoiled rice bran and soya bean meal classifiable as animal feed liable
to export duty. – Schokhi Industrials Pvt. Ltd. v. Collector –
1991 (55) E.L.T. 552 (Tribunal).
