Strict compliance with exemption conditions required; missing prescribed certificates defeated eligibility under the customs notification.

Notification No. 108/95-C.E. granted exemption only on prior production of a certificate from the United Nations or an International Organisation confirming official use or supply to an approved project financed by that organisation. The Tribunal treated this documentary requirement as a condition precedent, not a procedural formality, and held that strict compliance was necessary for the exemption. It also noted that the later amended notification required a certificate from the nodal ministry in the Government of India, which was likewise not produced, and a project authority certificate could not replace the prescribed document. The exemption was therefore unavailable.

---

---

Issues: Whether the benefit of Notification No. 108/95-C.E. was admissible when the manufacturer did not produce the certificate from the United Nations or the International Organisation, and whether the amended notification required production of a certificate from the nodal ministry in the Government of India.

Analysis: The exemption under Notification No. 108/95-C.E. was expressly made subject to a proviso requiring production, before clearance, of a certificate from the United Nations or an International Organisation confirming that the goods were intended for official use or for supply to a project financed by such organisation and approved by the Government of India. The record showed that no such certificate from the financing International Organisation was produced. The Tribunal held that this requirement was not a mere procedural formality but a condition precedent for availing the exemption, and that exemption notifications must be strictly complied with. The later amendment by Notification No. 7/98-C.E. also required a certificate from the nodal ministry in the Government of India, which was likewise not produced; the certificate from the project authority could not substitute the prescribed certificate.

Conclusion: The exemption was not available to the goods, and the challenge to denial of the benefit failed.

Final Conclusion: The appeals were rejected because the mandatory documentary conditions for claiming the exemption were not fulfilled.

Ratio Decidendi: Conditions attached to an exemption notification are mandatory and must be strictly complied with; failure to produce the prescribed certificate defeats entitlement to the exemption.

---