Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether the imported tee shirt printing and curing machinery was entitled to the benefit of Notification No. 108/89 read with Notification No. 16/85-Cus. despite being imported as two separate units and despite the adjudicating authority's restrictive reading of the entry.
Analysis: The entry for "Tee Shirt Printing Curing Machine" was not to be read in isolation from the notification's object, which was to grant exemption to machinery for use in the garment or hosiery industry. The Tribunal found that the relevant entry was materially identical to the ITC policy entry under which the import had been accepted, and that the expression itself was capable of more than one meaning. The department also did not controvert the technical certificate showing that printing and curing were interdependent processes in the same manufacturing operation. In these circumstances, the ambiguity had to be resolved in favour of the importer and the notification construed liberally to advance its purpose.
Conclusion: The benefit of Notification No. 108/89 read with Notification No. 16/85-Cus. was held admissible to the appellants.
Final Conclusion: The appeal succeeded and the appellants were granted the customs exemption claimed, with consequential relief.
Ratio Decidendi: Where an exemption notification is ambiguous and the goods fall within its beneficial object, the interpretation that advances the exemption and favours the importer should be adopted.