Conditional import exemption denied where export obligation was not proved and discharge certificate was not produced

A conditional import concession under Notification No. 97/2004 was unavailable where the importer failed to produce the Export Obligation Discharge Certificate and did not prove fulfilment of the export obligation within the prescribed period. The exemption depended on strict compliance with the notification's conditions, and absence of documentary proof of discharge meant the concessional benefit could not be sustained. On that basis, the duty and interest demand was upheld. The stated principle is that when an exemption or concessional import benefit is expressly conditional, non-production of the discharge certificate and failure to establish compliance with the export obligation disentitle the importer to the benefit.

---

---

Issues: Whether the importer was entitled to retain the benefit of Notification No. 97/2004 despite non-production of the Export Obligation Discharge Certificate and alleged non-fulfilment of the export obligation.

Analysis: The concession under the notification was contingent upon compliance with its stipulated conditions, including fulfilment of the export obligation within the prescribed period. The record showed that the importer had not furnished the EODC certificate from the licensing authority. In the absence of proof of compliance with the notification conditions, the claim to the concessional benefit could not be sustained.

Conclusion: The importer was not entitled to the benefit of Notification No. 97/2004, and the order confirming duty and interest was upheld.

Ratio Decidendi: Where exemption or concessional import benefit is conditional, non-production of the discharge certificate and failure to establish fulfilment of the export obligation disentitle the importer to the benefit.

---