S. Grover, Vice President

1. Under Section 131 of the Customs Act, 1962 (hereinafter referred to as the Act), V.V. Dabke Sons, Customs House Agents, Bombay hereinafter referred as the agents filed a revision petition before the Government of India on 15th June, 1981, contesting Order in Appeal No. S/49-1041/80-AIR dated 25th of February, 1981 passed by the Appellate Collector of Customs, Bombay by which he rejected the Agents' claim to refund of duty in respect of designs and drawings imported by Air-Bill of Entry Cash No. 2248 of 27th December, 1979. The revision petition stands transferred to the Tribunal under Section 131-B of the Act as appeal and is disposed of as such.

2. We consider necessary not only to reproduce the petition, order of the Appellate Collector of Customs but also the order of the Assistant Collector of Customs rejecting the refund claim with a purpose to show that the Agents filed appeal in their own right without even indicating as to who were the real importers who could be said to be aggrieved by the order of rejection of refund claim and then rejection of the appeal against such order :

"The Joint Secretary to the Government of India, Ministry of Finance (Department of Revenue and Insurance), New Delhi.

Dear Sir,

Sub : Refund of Auxiliary Duty in respect of Designs and Drawings imported by air-Bill of Entry Cash No. 2248 of 27th December, 1979.

We beg to approach the Government of India against the order in Appeal No. S/49-1041/80 AIR dated 25-2-1981 passed by the Appellate Collector of Customs, Bombay. We enclose the following :

1. Copy of the order duly stamped.

2. A challan showing the payment of a fee of Rs. 125/-

3. A spare copy of this application.

The ground of the application is the interpretation of the terms "Charts and Plar s" used in the Notification No. 95 of 12-5-1978 as amended on 9-12-78. Under this notification the articles are exempt from the levy of auxiliary duty. The applicants have imported the same articles with the description "designs and drawings" and claimed the exemption.

The Appellate authority has held that the words charts and plans do not include the drawings and designs. We quote below the equivalents of the word design from the famous Oxford dictionary.

"Design-purpose, plan, outline or sketch"

Here the word plan is specifically given as an equivalent for the word "Design".

The learned Appellate Collector has also given an explanation of the word plan and this explanation fully agrees with the meaning of the word design. The word plan shows intended outline or a sketch and the word design shows the same thing. The word plan is used for representation on a plain surface and the design also does the same thing. It also indicates representation on a plain surface. The word design can also be used for a building or a project. Hence the terms plan and design are congruent in meaning.

The Appellate Collector has erred in holding them to be different and dissimilar.

The word Drawing is only a part of the Plan or Design. The Plan or Design is a broader concept and the drawing forms a part of it. The term plan therefore also covers the same.

The applicants therefore pray that the correct implication of the terms plan and design may be appreciated and the articles imported may be held to be covered by the notification. In effect the amount of auxiliary duty recovered may be ordered to be refunded.

We enclose the invoice, duty bill and copy of the Notification No. 95 and 231.

Thanking you.

ORDER

Exemption of Auxiliary duty is claimed vide Notification 95/78 as amended by Notification 231/78. The Sl. No. of notification claimed 7. As per this, the goods which are so exempted are paper money, books printed including covers for printed Books, Periodicals, Maps, Charts, and Plans etc.

Heard appellants. They reiterated the arguments. The impugned goods are worded 'Drawings and Designs' Appellants claim that Drawings and designs are same as Charts and Plans. 'Charts' refer to a system of repres