Exemption election under Notification 9/2001-CE bars simultaneous claim to Notification 8/2001-CE for the same first clearances.

A manufacturer who elects the concessional regime under Notification No. 9/2001-CE by exercising the required written option before the first clearances cannot later shift the same first-clearance turnover to another exemption. The option remains effective for the rest of the financial year and is not withdrawable, so once that choice is made, clearances within the prescribed initial limit are governed by that notification. On that construction, job-work clearances forming part of the same first-clearance threshold could not simultaneously claim Notification No. 8/2001-CE, and the demand was sustained.

---

---

Issues: Whether a manufacturer who had exercised the option under Notification No. 9/2001-CE for concessional duty on the first clearances up to the prescribed turnover could also claim the benefit of Notification No. 8/2001-CE for job-work clearances within the same first-clearance limit.

Analysis: Notification No. 9/2001-CE required the manufacturer to exercise the option in writing before the first clearances and provided that such option would remain effective for the remaining part of the financial year and could not be withdrawn. On that construction, once the appellant opted for the concessional regime under Notification No. 9/2001-CE for clearances up to the prescribed limit, the same clearances could not be shifted to another exemption. Since the job-work clearances also formed part of the first clearances within the same monetary threshold, Notification No. 8/2001-CE was not available simultaneously.

Conclusion: The appellant was not entitled to claim Notification No. 8/2001-CE for the relevant clearances, and the demand was sustained.

---