Strict construction of exemption notifications denies patch prints relief where the goods are not expressly covered.

Exemption notifications must be construed strictly by their express terms, and goods not specifically covered cannot claim ancillary benefit merely because they relate to exempted articles. On that basis, patch prints of exposed cinematograph films were treated as fragments or replacements of a feature film, not as feature films themselves, so the exemption under Notification No. 112/75 as amended did not apply. The analysis further states that duty remained chargeable under Tariff Item 37(II)(2), and no separate concession for such prints was shown.

---

---

Issues: Whether patch prints of exposed cinematograph films were entitled to exemption under Notification No. 112/75 as amended by Notification No. 129/76, and whether they were liable to duty under Tariff Item 37(II)(2).

Analysis: The exemption notification was confined to films made in black and white other than advertisement shots, and patch prints were not specifically covered by it. Patch prints were only fragments or replacements of a complete feature film and could not be treated as feature films for the purpose of exemption. Since the assessee had not claimed the benefit of the notification before the adjudicating authority, and no separate concession for such prints was shown to exist, the classification and duty liability under the relevant tariff entry remained unaffected.

Conclusion: The patch prints were not eligible for exemption under Notification No. 112/75 as amended, and duty was correctly chargeable under Tariff Item 37(II)(2). The finding of the Collector (Appeals) was set aside.

Final Conclusion: The appeal succeeded and the revenue's stand on duty liability was upheld.

Ratio Decidendi: An exemption notification must be construed according to its express terms, and goods not specifically covered by the exemption cannot claim its benefit merely because they are connected with exempted articles.

---