Customs exemption for project imports upheld where contract records showed the importer as a named sub-contractor.

Exemption notifications must be construed strictly, but eligibility under Notification No. 21/2002-Customs depends on the contractual and project records. The concession agreement, letter of acceptance and project authority certificate showed that the importer had been awarded the project work and was treated as a named sub-contractor for the eligible project. The exclusion of Revenue's reliance on earlier joint venture and consortium cases was accepted because those facts were different. The exemption was therefore available and the challenge to the claim failed.

---

---

Issues: Whether the respondent was entitled to the benefit of exemption under Notification No. 21/2002-Customs dated 01-03-2002 for the imported piling rig as a contractor or sub-contractor under the project arrangement.

Analysis: Exemption notifications are to be construed strictly, but the entitlement depends on the actual contractual and project documents. The concession agreement, the letter of acceptance, and the project authority certificate showed that the respondent had been awarded the project work and was described as a sub-contractor for the project. The authority also relied on the explanatory notes indicating that a contractor awarded a road construction contract or a named sub-contractor could avail the exemption. The earlier decisions relied on by Revenue were distinguished because they arose on different facts involving a joint venture or consortium, whereas the present respondent was found to be the sole contractor/sub-contractor under the project documents.

Conclusion: The respondent was eligible for the exemption under Notification No. 21/2002-Customs dated 01-03-2002, and Revenue's challenge failed.

Final Conclusion: The exemption claim was upheld on the basis of the project documents and the appeal was rejected.

Ratio Decidendi: Where the project records establish that the importer was awarded the contract or was a named sub-contractor for the eligible project, the exemption cannot be denied merely by a strict reading divorced from the contractual documentation.

---