Substantive exemption under a customs notification cannot be denied solely because it was claimed after clearance.

Imported biscuits were held eligible for the CVD exemption under Notification No. 3/06-CE because the goods were otherwise covered by the notification, and no finding showed that the exemption was substantively inapplicable. The benefit could not be denied merely because the importer did not claim it in the bill of entry or at the time of clearance. Following earlier decisions of the same Bench, the principle applied was that a substantive exemption may be allowed at the first appellate stage when the legal conditions for the notification are satisfied. The later claim did not defeat entitlement to the notification benefit.

---

---

Issues: Whether the importer was entitled to the benefit of Notification No. 3/06-CE dated 01-03-2006 for CVD on imported biscuits even though the claim was not made at the time of clearance of the goods.

Analysis: The benefit of the notification was available to the imported biscuits at the time of import, and there was no finding that the exemption was otherwise inapplicable. The fact that the claim was not made in the bill of entry or at clearance did not justify denial of the substantive exemption. The earlier appellate decisions of the same Bench were followed to hold that an exemption notification benefit can be granted when claimed at the first appellate stage if the goods were otherwise covered by the notification.

Conclusion: The importer was entitled to the notification benefit, and denial of the exemption merely because it was claimed later was not justified.

Ratio Decidendi: A substantive exemption available under the applicable notification cannot be denied solely on the ground that it was not claimed at the time of clearance, if the goods are otherwise covered by the notification.

---