Strict construction of exemption notification bars company from claiming replacement-parts benefit tied to private personal property.

Notification No. 80/70-Cus. was held inapplicable to replacement parts imported by a company because the exemption was limited to replacements of defective articles that were the importer's private personal property. The expression "private personal property" was given its plain meaning, and property imported by a corporate entity was not treated as an individual's private personal property. The notification was therefore strictly construed, with no scope to enlarge its language by intendment. On that construction, the company could not claim the exemption and the Revenue's challenge succeeded.

---

---

Issues: Whether the benefit of Notification No. 80/70-Cus. dated 29-8-1970 was available to replacement parts imported by a company, where the notification required the defective articles to be the importers' private personal property.

Analysis: The notification exempted articles and component parts imported as replacements of defective articles only if the earlier imported defective articles were the private personal properties of the importers. The expression "private personal property" was construed in its plain sense and, on that meaning, property imported by a corporate entity was not treated as the private personal property of an individual importer. The exemption notification was held to be strictly construed, and there was no scope for importing intendment or enlarging its language to cover a company's goods.

Conclusion: The benefit of Notification No. 80/70-Cus. was not available to the respondent company.

Final Conclusion: The Revenue's appeal succeeded and the order granting exemption was set aside.

Ratio Decidendi: An exemption notification must be construed strictly according to its clear language, and a condition confined to an individual's private personal property cannot be extended to property of a company.

---