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 imported computer software used in conjunction with machinery was entitled to exemption under Notification No. 11/97-Cus. dated 01.03.1997, and whether the amendment introduced by Notification No. 3/98-Cus. dated 11.02.1998 could be applied retrospectively to deny that benefit.
Analysis: The imported software was examined and found to be used for controlling or managing industrial processes and data systems. The exemption under Notification No. 11/97-Cus. was available at the relevant time, and the later explanatory amendment introducing a restriction regarding interaction with special machines or instruments operated only from 11.02.1998. The later notification could not be given retrospective effect to withdraw the exemption for imports made earlier. The issue was also covered by prior decisions applying the same notification to similar software imports.
Conclusion: The imported software was eligible for exemption under Notification No. 11/97-Cus. and the later amendment could not be applied retrospectively to deny the benefit.
Final Conclusion: The appeal failed and the order allowing the exemption was sustained.
Ratio Decidendi: A subsequent explanatory amendment to an exemption notification cannot be applied retrospectively to defeat an exemption that was available on the date of import, especially where the imported software falls within the scope of the notification as then existing.