Exemption notification limits control entitlement where goods fall outside specified tariff entries; penalty was set aside.

Notification No. 83/94-CE was held unavailable because the goods manufactured did not fall within the notification's specified tariff entries. The exemption could not be claimed merely on the basis of an undertaking given by the raw material supplier, and the cited precedent was found inapplicable on the facts. As the job work activity was already within the department's knowledge, the demand was restricted to the normal period; duty and consequential interest were sustained, while penalty was not warranted.

---

---

Issues: Whether the benefit of Notification No. 83/94-CE dated 11.04.1994 was available to the goods manufactured by the appellant and, if not, whether the demand of duty, interest and penalty could be sustained.

Analysis: Notification No. 83/94-CE applied only to the goods specified therein, namely the relevant sub-headings under the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985. The goods manufactured by the appellant did not fall within the coverage of that notification, and the exemption could not be claimed merely because the raw material supplier had given an undertaking. The reliance placed on the cited precedent was held to be inapplicable on the facts. Since the job work activity was within the department's knowledge from the outset, the demand was confined to the normal period and penalty was not warranted.

Conclusion: The exemption was not available to the appellant. The duty demand for the normal period and the consequential interest were sustained, but no penalty was imposed.

Final Conclusion: The appeal failed on the substantive exemption claim, while succeeding only to the limited extent of relief from penalty.

Ratio Decidendi: An exemption notification cannot be extended to goods not covered by its specified tariff entries, and an undertaking by a third party does not create entitlement where the notification itself is inapplicable.

---