Crocs are cool again

Looking at what is considered fashionable today, it is clear that trends always come back into style.

First it was scrunchies, then Juicy Couture - now Crocs are making a comeback.

Always considered a divisive shoe, Crocs have officially come out on top and proven their place in the world of high-fashion - after Balenciaga’s $850 version of the shoe sold out before they were released.

Originally designed by Demna Gvasalia for Balenciaga, the foam-platform shoes took centre stage when they were introduced on the runway.

And now it appears they will be showing up on feet everywhere this season.

However, apart from a 10cm platform addition, it would be easy to mistake the new outrageously expensive Crocs for the now-retro ones of our childhoods.

Featuring the same pastel colours and buttons that can be attached for added flair, the Balenciaga Platform Crocs look almost identical to the real plastic-y slip-on Crocs you can purchase for a quarter of the price - but that hasn’t stopped people from going crazy over them.

With the Women Spring Summer 18 runway show, Balenciaga launches the “Foam” shoes, a 10 cm platform version of the iconic @Crocs clog. pic.twitter.com/TsjgjkllF2

— Balenciaga (@BALENCIAGA) October 1, 2017
The platform plastic shoes originally went on pre-sale on Barney’s website on February 1 - but within a matter of hours, all of the new and improved Crocs had sold out.

A lot of people are probably understandably confused, considering the comments and reactions from people mocking the shoes on Twitter when they were first introduced.

What a tragic era in fashion and it’s even worst that is from @BALENCIAGA https://t.co/DmruuGkD06

— • Kylo Blossom • (@KikeSalazar) October 2, 2017
The world is officially ending soon

— Busisiwe (@BusisiweThandoG) October 2, 2017
Burn Them All.
Balenciaga is Cancelled.

— No (@erisonic8) October 1, 2017
Despite the haters, Balenciaga has proved crocs can be cool - and worth $850.

(Source: Independent)

Footwear without back strap is sandal, not chappal: HC

Is a woman’s footwear without a back strap a “sandal” or a “chappal”? The Delhi High Court ruled earlier this week that it is a “sandal.”

The judgment came after a Chennai-based footwear manufacturer, Wishall International, challenged the Centre’s position that a woman’s footwear without a back strap is a chappal and not a sandal.

Duty drawback
At the core of the dispute is the Centre’s order that export of sandals attracts 10% customs duty drawback while export of chappals attracts only 5% drawback.

A customs duty drawback is a refund given to business houses or manufacturers who import machinery or raw material in order to export their product.

These manufacturers pay import duty on purchase of the raw material but can later claim a drawback, or refund on the duty paid, as they export their product. This is done to encourage exports.

Wishall demanded duty drawback at 10%, claiming their products were sandals but the Centre and Revenue Department claimed they were chappals and hence the company was entitled to only 5% drawback.

The dispute broke out in May 2003 when the company filed a shipping bill to export “ladies leather sandals.”

The Customs Department in New Delhi, however, said the export consignment were chappals not sandals.

The company then sought an opinion from the Council of Leather Exports, which cleared the export consignment as sandals.

It was now the turn of the Customs to move the Council, which sought the opinion of the Footwear Design and Development Institute (FDDI) in Noida.

FDDI ruling
The FDDI ruled the product to be chappals. Following this, the Customs served a show-cause notice on the company, demanding recovery of the drawback already paid at 10% as well as a penalty.

The dispute ultimately landed before the Delhi High Court. The company said the fact that the product did not contain a back strap did not “detract from the fact that they were known to the users as sandals”.

A Bench of Justice S. Ravindra Bhat and Justice Najmi Waziri ruled that the Centre and the Revenue Department “acted upon prejudice and a preconceived notion that ladies sandals cannot be without a back strap.”

“The Council, a Central government body, which routinely deals with these issues, had furnished an opinion that the goods were sandals and not chappals. Apart from this, the court wonders whether any of the experts in this case was a woman, the ultimate customers,” the Bench said.

Relied on SC ruling
The court relied on a 1989 Supreme Court judgment which held that if any expression in the statute, in this case sandal and chappal, then the items in the Customs entries should be judged on the basis of how these expressions are used in popular parlance.

(Source: The Hindu)