Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether polyurethane granules and powder imported for laying athletic tracks were covered by the exemption under Notification No. 109/94-Customs and whether, on the facts, a partial waiver of pre-deposit was justified.
Analysis: The notification, as it stood at the relevant time, exempted synthetic tracks and artificial surfaces falling under Heading 95.06, together with equipment required for their installation, subject to production of the prescribed certificate. The goods imported were raw materials for making the track and were classifiable as such, not as finished synthetic tracks or artificial surfaces. The scheme of the sports department could not enlarge the scope of the customs exemption. The later notification expressly extended relief to goods for laying artificial surfaces and synthetic tracks, which showed that such raw materials were not covered earlier. The certificate produced did not bring the goods within the notification, and the relevant test was the condition of the goods at the time of assessment.
Conclusion: The claimed exemption was not available to the imported raw materials. However, considering the appellant's status and the circumstances, only a partial pre-deposit was directed, with waiver of the balance on compliance.
Ratio Decidendi: An exemption notification must be construed strictly, and goods are to be classified according to their form at the time of import; later enlargement of the exemption does not govern earlier imports.