Transfer of residence concession cannot be denied merely because imported appliances appear new when possession and use are otherwise established.

Transfer of residence concession for a room air-conditioner and a car air-conditioner was considered under the Transfer of Residence Rules. An accepted purchase voucher was treated as proof of acquisition, and a service invoice supported continued possession and use during the relevant minimum period. Once possession for the prescribed period is established, use may ordinarily be presumed. The concession could not be denied merely because the articles appeared new or lacked visible signs of use, absent contrary evidence. On that basis, the appellant was held entitled to the transfer of residence benefit for both air-conditioners.

---

---

Issues: Entitlement to transfer of residence concession for a room air-conditioner and a car air-conditioner under the Transfer of Residence Rules.

Analysis: The accepted purchase voucher established acquisition of the air-conditioners, and the service invoice supported continued possession and use during the relevant period. Once possession for the prescribed minimum period is shown or accepted, use during that period can ordinarily be presumed. Denial of the concession merely because the goods appeared new or did not display obvious signs of use was held unsustainable in the absence of contrary evidence.

Conclusion: The appellant was entitled to transfer of residence concession for both air-conditioners.

Ratio Decidendi: Where possession for the prescribed minimum period is established, use may ordinarily be presumed, and transfer of residence benefit cannot be denied solely because the article looks new or does not show visible signs of use.

---