Re-import exemption under customs notification applies only when the imported goods are the same as those earlier exported.

Re-import exemption under Notification No. 94/96-Cus was available only when the goods re-imported were the very same goods earlier exported. On the facts, the exported goods were chassis fitted with engines, while the imported goods were fully built buses with additional fitments and accessories. Since customs assessment had to be made on the goods as presented on import, the materially different description and tariff classification meant the condition in the notification was not satisfied. Authorities concerning bus-body manufacture, works contract, or export-sale issues were held irrelevant because they did not govern the exemption condition. The denial of exemption was upheld.

---

---

Issues: Whether the appellant was entitled to exemption under Notification No. 94/96-Cus dated 16.12.1996 on re-import of goods said to be the same as those earlier exported.

Analysis: The benefit of the notification was available only if the goods re-imported were the same as the goods exported. On the facts found, the exported goods were chassis fitted with engine, whereas the goods imported were fully built buses with additional fitments and accessories. For customs purposes, the goods had to be assessed as presented, and the imported goods were materially different in description and tariff classification from the exported goods. Decisions relating to manufacture of bus bodies, works contract, or sale in the course of export did not assist because they concerned different legal issues and did not govern the condition in the notification.

Conclusion: The appellant was not entitled to the benefit of Notification No. 94/96-Cus and the denial of exemption was upheld.

Ratio Decidendi: Re-import exemption is available only when the goods re-imported are the very same goods as those exported, as assessed on import in the form presented to customs.

---