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 machine, described as a tool room precision co-ordinate jig boring machine, was entitled to exemption under Serial No. 2 of Notification No. 40/78-Cus. dated 1-3-1978.
Analysis: The exemption entry covered tool room precision co-ordinate jig boring machines with or without numerical control. The competing material showed that the imported machine could perform drilling, boring, reaming, countersinking, facing and milling, and was described in the manufacturer's literature as a general purpose machine tool. The Tribunal applied the common parlance understanding of a jig boring machine, treated technical literature as only an aid, and held that the notification could not be enlarged by extending it to a sophisticated multi-functional machine not clearly within the plain wording of the exemption. The majority also held that the cited certificates and recommendations did not displace the plain meaning of the notification.
Conclusion: The machine was held not to fall within Serial No. 2 of Notification No. 40/78-Cus. and the exemption was denied.
Final Conclusion: The appeal failed and the impugned order denying exemption was sustained.
Ratio Decidendi: An exemption notification must be construed strictly on its plain terms, and where the imported goods do not clearly answer the commercial description used in the notification, the benefit cannot be extended by liberal interpretation or by relying on ancillary technical capabilities.