Exemption notification cannot be enlarged by circular; waiver of pre-deposit granted on prima facie case.

An exemption notification cannot be expanded by a departmental circular to add an end-use certificate condition where the notification itself contains no such requirement. The goods were cleared under Notification No. 11/97-Cus., and the appellate authority's insistence on an end-use certificate was rejected because administrative instructions cannot curtail or enlarge the scope of an exemption notification. On that basis, the appellants established a prima facie case for waiver of pre-deposit of duty and interest and for stay of recovery.

---

---

Issues: Whether pre-deposit of duty and interest was required when the exemption notification did not prescribe an end-use certificate condition and the departmental circular sought to add such a requirement.

Analysis: The goods were cleared under Notification No. 11/97-Cus. and the notification itself was found to contain no condition requiring an end-use certificate. The appellate authority had relied on a circular to insist upon such a condition, but a circular cannot impose a requirement not found in the notification. The view was supported by binding precedent that administrative instructions cannot curtail or enlarge the scope of an exemption notification.

Conclusion: The appellants made out a prima facie case for waiver of pre-deposit and stay of recovery.

---