Private personal property exemption applied to re-imported repaired goods held to belong to a company.

Goods re-imported after repairs were held to fall within "private personal property" for purposes of the exemption notification, because a company is a legal person and its goods can qualify as its private personal property. The Tribunal followed the Bombay High Court view, found no contrary authority produced by the Revenue, and accepted that the notification's conditions were satisfied. On that basis, denial of exemption and the assessment made under the later notification were unsustainable, and the exemption benefit was upheld.

---

---

Issues: Whether the goods re-imported after repairs by a company could be treated as private personal property so as to claim the benefit of Notification No. 174-Cus/66 dated 24/09/66.

Analysis: The appellate authority granted relief by following the Bombay High Court decision holding that the expression "private personal property" was wide enough to cover the goods in question and that the conditions of the exemption notification stood satisfied. The Tribunal noted that no contrary authority was shown by the Revenue. It also accepted that a company is a legal person in the eye of law and that goods belonging to it can constitute its private personal property for the purpose of the notification. On that basis, denial of the exemption and the assessment made under Notification No. 94/96 dated 16/12/96 was found unsustainable.

Conclusion: The benefit of the exemption notification was rightly allowed and the Revenue's appeal failed.

---