Exemption notification interpretation: rolled PUC insole material was treated as sheetings, not sheets, denying relief.

PUC insole material imported in rolled lengths was held not to fall within the expression "in-soles, midsoles and sheets thereof" in Notification No. 20/99. Applying the Supreme Court's distinction between "sheets" and "sheetings", the rolled goods were treated as sheetings, especially since they were only cut to size after import for manufacture. Earlier Tribunal rulings cited by the importer were distinguished because they did not reflect the binding interpretation of the exemption wording. The exemption was therefore denied, and the classification-based interpretation was upheld against the assessee.

---

---

Issues: Whether PUC insole material imported in rolled length of 50 metres was covered by Sl. No. 110 of List 3(a)(3) of Notification No. 20/99 as "in-soles, midsoles and sheets thereof".

Analysis: The description in the notification was construed in the light of the Supreme Court ruling distinguishing "sheets" from "sheetings". The goods were admittedly imported in rolled form and were being cut to size only after import for use in manufacture of insoles and midsoles. Earlier Tribunal decisions relied upon by the appellant were found distinguishable because they did not consider the binding effect of the Supreme Court's interpretation of the expression used in an exemption notification. On that construction, rolled material was treated as sheetings and not sheets cut to size.

Conclusion: The imported goods did not answer the description of "sheets" under the notification, and the denial of exemption was upheld against the assessee.

---