Customs exemption for refractory blocks upheld where import policy definitions could not restrict the notification's scope.

Refractory blocks imported for use in a furnace were held to fall within the scope of Notification No. 77/90-Customs because the notification was identically worded to another exemption provision already construed by the Supreme Court as covering refractory blocks. The objection that the goods were not furnace components was rejected, since Import Policy definitions of "component" and "spare" could not control the meaning of a customs exemption notification. The prior denial of exemption on the ground that the blocks were not components of the furnace was therefore unsustainable, and the assessee was held entitled to the exemption benefit.

---

---

Issues: Whether refractory blocks imported by the assessee were entitled to exemption under Notification No. 77/90-Customs, notwithstanding the description of the goods as blocks and the objection that they were not components of the furnace.

Analysis: The goods were held to fall within the scope of the exemption because the exemption notification was identically worded to another notification already construed by the Supreme Court as covering refractory blocks under the expression used in the notification. The objection based on the Import Policy definitions of "component" and "spare" was rejected as those policy definitions could not control the scope of the customs exemption notification. The earlier denial of exemption on the ground that the goods were not components of the furnace was therefore not sustainable.

Conclusion: The imported refractory blocks were eligible for the benefit of the exemption notification and the denial of exemption was set aside in favour of the assessee.

---