Aluminium exemption under excise notification applied to imported goods; proviso for levy aluminium did not bar refund.

Notification No. 164/75-CE exempted aluminium from part of the excise duty otherwise leviable, but its proviso excluded levy aluminium required to be supplied under the Aluminium (Control) Order, 1970, and goods made from such levy aluminium. Because the goods in question were imported aluminium, not indigenous levy aluminium supplied under the control order, the proviso did not apply. On that basis, the refund claim could not be rejected for non-compliance with the proviso, and the exemption remained available to the imported goods. The alternative ground based on the date of entry into territorial waters was not pressed and was not examined.

---

---

Issues: Whether the exemption under Notification No. 164/75-CE applied to imported aluminium goods, and whether the proviso excluding levy aluminium supplied under the Aluminium (Control) Order, 1970, could be invoked against such goods.

Analysis: The notification exempted aluminium from part of the excise duty otherwise leviable, but its proviso specifically carved out levy aluminium required to be supplied under the Aluminium (Control) Order, 1970, and goods manufactured out of such levy aluminium. The admitted facts showed that the goods were imported aluminium and not indigenous levy aluminium supplied under the control order. On that footing, the conditions in the proviso were inapplicable to the subject goods, and the refund claim could not be rejected on the premise that the proviso had not been satisfied. The ground based on the date when the goods entered territorial waters was not pressed and was not examined.

Conclusion: The exemption notification applied to the imported goods, the proviso did not exclude them, and the refund claim was liable to succeed.

---