Customs exemption for free trade zone parity failed where importer could not fit the claim within the notification's plain language.

Notification No. 89/82 exempted imports from the additional duty under Section 3 of the Customs Tariff Act, 1975 only to the extent that the duty exceeded the excise duty on like goods produced outside a free trade zone. The exemption was linked to the statutory distinction between goods manufactured inside and outside a free trade zone and was intended to avoid an anomalous burden under the excise and customs scheme. On the plain language of the notification, the importer could not claim the benefit in the manner urged, and the levy of additional duty remained sustainable.

---

---

Issues: Whether the importer was entitled to exemption from additional duty under Notification No. 89/82 dated 25.03.1982 on imports of Ortho Oxylene, so as to avoid levy of countervailing duty under Section 3 of the Customs Tariff Act, 1975.

Analysis: The Notification exempted imports from so much of the additional duty leviable under Section 3 of the Customs Tariff Act, 1975 as exceeded the duty of excise leviable on like goods produced outside a free trade zone. The exemption was tied to the statutory distinction between goods manufactured in a free trade zone and those manufactured outside it under the excise regime, and was intended to prevent hardship and an anomalous burden. On the plain language of the Notification and the statutory scheme, the benefit could not be claimed in the manner urged by the importer.

Conclusion: The importer was not entitled to the benefit of Notification No. 89/82, and the levy of additional duty was sustainable.

---