Exemption notification interpretation: exclusive use for data processing equipment could not be read into the customs exemption.

Notification No. 25/2005-Cus. was read according to its plain wording, and the exemption turned on whether the imported UPS answered the description of a static converter for data processing equipment. An end-use condition or exclusive use for a particular automatic data processing machine was not found in the notification, so no such requirement could be read into it. The attempt to import the word "exclusively" was rejected because exemption notifications cannot be expanded or restricted by adding words. The HSN discussion could not override the clear text, and the benefit of the notification was allowed.

---

---

Issues: Whether UPS was entitled to exemption under Notification No. 25/2005-Cus. dated 01.03.2005, and whether the benefit could be denied on the ground that the goods were not exclusively meant for Automatic Data Processing equipment.

Analysis: The notification was construed according to its plain wording. The decisive requirement was that the imported goods answer the description of static converter for data processing equipment. The text of the exemption did not prescribe an end-use test or require exclusive use for a particular ADP machine. The attempt to read the word "exclusively" into the notification was rejected, as no word can be added to or deleted from an exemption notification. The earlier coordinate bench view was followed, and the HSN discussion could not override the clear wording of the notification.

Conclusion: UPS could not be denied the benefit of Notification No. 25/2005-Cus. merely because it was not shown to be exclusively used for ADP equipment. The issue was decided in favour of the assessee.

---