Independent exemption notifications can coexist when their conditions are met; set-off remains confined to the specific goods covered.

Notification No. 144/75-C.E. was confined to duty-paid fresh unused steel melting scrap and duty-paid unused steel scrap, so set-off was not available on bazar scrap treated merely as duty paid; the adjustment mechanism remained limited to the specified goods and proof of duty payment contemplated by the notification. Notification No. 237/75-C.E. operated independently and could not be denied merely because set-off or proforma credit had also been availed, since simultaneous benefit was not excluded where each notification's conditions were satisfied. The stated principle is that one concession does not bar another unless the scheme itself says so.

---

---

Issues: (i) whether, under Notification No. 144/75-C.E., set-off was admissible on bazar scrap treated as duty paid, and (ii) whether the benefit of Notification No. 237/75-C.E. could be denied because the assessee had also availed of the set-off or proforma credit mechanism.

Issue (i): whether, under Notification No. 144/75-C.E., set-off was admissible on bazar scrap treated as duty paid

Analysis: The exemption under Notification No. 144/75 was confined to duty paid fresh unused steel melting scrap and duty paid unused steel scrap. The proviso limited adjustment to duty proved to have been paid on such specified scrap. The circular relied upon for treating market scrap as duty paid applied to secondary re-rollers and to iron and steel products under the earlier tariff item, and did not extend the notification benefit to bazar scrap used by the appellant.

Conclusion: Set-off was not admissible on bazar scrap treated merely as duty paid; the demand required revision only to the limited extent indicated in relation to the applicable exemption conditions.

Issue (ii): whether the benefit of Notification No. 237/75-C.E. could be denied because the assessee had also availed of the set-off or proforma credit mechanism

Analysis: Notification No. 237/75 and Notification No. 144/75 operated in different fields, and nothing in either notification excluded simultaneous availability of the other if their respective conditions were satisfied. Bazar scrap fell within the category of old iron or steel melting scrap, and the assessee satisfied the notification requirements. Availing of set-off under one scheme did not alter the duty-paid character of the scrap or bar the concessional rate under the other notification.

Conclusion: The assessee was entitled to the benefit of Notification No. 237/75-C.E. and the concessional rate of duty under it.

Final Conclusion: The demand was sustained only to the extent consistent with the restrictive scope of Notification No. 144/75-C.E., while the assessee succeeded on entitlement to the concessional rate under Notification No. 237/75-C.E.; the matter was disposed of accordingly.

Ratio Decidendi: Where exemption notifications operate independently and their conditions are separately satisfied, availing one concession does not bar the other, but set-off under a notification remains confined to the specific goods and duty contemplated by that notification.

---