Ms Puma Sports India Pvt Ltd vs Commissioner Of Customs-Mumbai Adj on 19 August, 2024
10. The appellant had declared tariff item 6109 1000 and tariff item
6109 9010/6109 9090 of First Schedule to Customs Tariff Act, 1975 as
appropriate to 'polo knitted shirts' imported by them which, according
to the impugned order, is aptly classifiable against tariff item 6105
2010/6106 1020 as these had collars with opening at the neckline to be
fastened with buttons and, hence, not 't-shirts' to which the claimed
classification applied. Likewise, the classification against tariff item
6103 3200 and tariff item 6103 3300/6103 3990 of First Schedule to
Customs Tariff Act, 1975, adopted on import of 'jackets with zip
fasteners', was revised to tariff item 6101 3010 as more appropriate to
clothing worn over regular clothing for protection against weather.
According to Learned Senior Counsel, such revision was not legally
valid except through appeal against order of assessment and that, at the
time of clearance, the goods were found to have matched the
description in the declared tariff line. Reliance was placed by him on
the decision of the Tribunal in Raj Television Network v. Commissioner
of Customs [2007 (215) ELT 71 (Tri-Chennai)], in Saint Gobain Glass
India Ltd v. Commissioner of Customs [2014 (313) ELT 680 (Tri-
Chennai)] and in BN Exim v. Commissioner of Customs [2016 (355)
ELT 357 (Tri-Ahmd)]. Learned Authorised Representative drew our
attention to the respective tariff lines to demonstrate the
C/85060-85063/2018
19
appropriateness of the revised classification.