Harmonious construction of customs notifications preserves earlier exemption benefits despite project import assessment

An importer assessed under Project Import Regulations and charged duty under Heading 98.01 was held entitled to the concessional customs duty under Notification No. 40/78-Cus., as amended, for an Extrusion Press falling under Chapter 84. The Court applied harmonious construction, holding that the later exemption notification contained a saving clause preserving other existing exemptions and did not override the earlier benefit. Assessment under a project import heading did not, by itself, defeat eligibility for the concessional rate, so the Revenue's challenge failed.

---

---

Issues: Whether an importer assessed under the Project Import (Regulations), 1986 and charged duty under Heading 98.01 of the Customs Tariff could still claim the concessional customs duty benefit under Notification No. 40/78-Cus. (as amended) for Extrusion Press falling under Chapter 84.

Analysis: The governing notification contained a saving clause that preserved exemptions granted under any other notification in force. The Tribunal had already adopted the same view in earlier decisions, and the Court found the issue covered by its own prior ruling that the later notification did not override or exclude the benefit available under the earlier exemption. The two notifications were required to be read together, and the project import assessment did not by itself bar the assessee from claiming the concessional rate.

Conclusion: The assessee was entitled to the benefit of the lower customs duty under Notification No. 40/78-Cus. (as amended), and the Revenue's challenge failed.

Ratio Decidendi: Where a later exemption notification contains a saving clause preserving other existing exemptions, the notifications must be construed harmoniously, and eligibility under one exemption is not defeated merely because the goods are assessed under a project import heading.

---