Exemption notification option once exercised cannot be changed mid-year merely for a more beneficial duty rate.

An assessee that exercised an option under an exemption notification and availed concessional duty could not later switch to another notification for the same period merely because it was more beneficial. The notification expressly barred a change of option during that year, and the Tribunal's finding that the assessee had already taken benefit under Notification No. 9/99 was treated as a factual basis supporting that bar. The High Court found no error in the Tribunal's conclusion and upheld the view that the attempted shift-over was impermissible. The questions of law were answered against the assessee.

---

---

Issues: Whether the assessee, having exercised an option and availed concessional duty benefit under one exemption notification, could later switch to another notification for the same period; and whether the Tribunal's finding denying such switch-over called for interference.

Analysis: The assessee had filed the relevant declaration opting for the concessional benefit under Notification No. 9/99 and had in fact availed duty at the concessional rate for part of the year. The notification contained a stipulation that once the option was exercised, the assessee could not change over during the course of that year. The Tribunal's decision rested on findings of fact showing that the assessee had taken the benefit under Notification No. 9/99 and thereafter attempted to shift to another notification merely because it was more advantageous. In those circumstances, the Court found no error in the Tribunal's conclusion.

Conclusion: The assessee could not switch over to another notification after having exercised the option and availed benefit under Notification No. 9/99; the Tribunal's finding was upheld and the questions of law were answered against the assessee.

Ratio Decidendi: An assessee who has exercised an option under an exemption notification and availed its benefit cannot later change over to another notification for the same period merely because the alternative is more beneficial.

---