Technical tariff reclassification does not defeat an existing exemption where the goods and exemption regime remain substantively unchanged.

A technical renumbering of tariff headings under the 2005 tariff restructuring did not alter the scope of an existing exemption where the duty regime and goods remained substantively unchanged. Spectacle lenses continued to qualify for exemption under Notification No. 6/2006-C.E. because they had already enjoyed nil duty, and the later 8-digit classification did not change their essential character. The description of the goods as semi-finished was held erroneous, as the power lenses were meant to be finished according to prescription and were, in substance, spectacle lenses covered by the exemption.

---

---

Issues: Whether spectacle lenses imported by the appellant were entitled to exemption under Notification No. 6/2006-C.E. dated 01.03.2006, despite reclassification as semi-finished spectacle lenses and the introduction of 8-digit tariff headings under Notification No. 1/2005-C.E. dated 24.02.2005.

Analysis: The tariff restructuring introduced in 2005 was held to be technical and not a substantive change in the duty regime or in the scope of the existing exemption. The exemption available to spectacle lenses continued to apply, as the goods had already enjoyed nil duty and the later re-numbering of tariff headings did not alter their essential character. The description of the goods as semi-finished was found to be erroneous, since they were power lenses meant to be finished according to prescription and were, in substance, spectacle lenses covered by the exemption.

Conclusion: The appellant was entitled to the exemption under Notification No. 6/2006-C.E. dated 01.03.2006; the denial of the benefit was set aside.

Ratio Decidendi: A technical reclassification or renumbering of tariff headings does not curtail an existing exemption where the underlying goods and the exemption regime remain substantively unchanged.

---