Exemption notification choice lets assessees claim the more beneficial notification when both apply to the same goods.

Where two exemption notifications are simultaneously available for the same goods, the assessee may opt for the more beneficial one. The Tribunal applied the settled principle that, in the context of exemptions, the general-specific rule does not override the taxpayer's choice between concurrent notifications. On that basis, denial of the alternative exemption was held unsustainable, and the impugned order was set aside in favour of the assessee.

---

---

Issues: Whether the assessee, having availed one exemption notification, could opt for the alternative notification that was more beneficial where both notifications were available for the same goods.

Analysis: The appeal turned on the settled principle that when two exemption notifications are simultaneously available, the assessee may choose the one that grants greater benefit. The Tribunal followed its earlier view that, in the context of exemption notifications, the rule that a specific provision prevails over a general one does not defeat the assessee's entitlement to the more beneficial exemption. Applying that principle, the denial of the alternative notification was not sustainable.

Conclusion: The assessee was entitled to claim the more beneficial exemption notification, and the impugned order was set aside in its favour.

Ratio Decidendi: Where two exemption notifications are simultaneously available for the same goods, the assessee may elect the notification that is more beneficial, and the general-specific rule does not curtail that choice in the case of exemptions.

---