Strict construction of exemption notifications denied relief for containers used with partially skimmed milk powder, and duty recovery was upheld.

Metal containers obtained under Chapter X procedure were held ineligible for exemption where they were used to pack partially skimmed milk powder, because the notification applied only to containers for skimmed milk powder and exemption conditions had to be strictly satisfied. The claimant bore the burden of proving full compliance with the declaration and procedural requirements, and a mismatch between the declared and actual use defeated the concession. The omission to cite Section 11A in the show cause notice did not invalidate the duty recovery, and the demand under Rule 196 remained enforceable.

---

---

Issues: Whether metal containers received under Chapter X procedure were eligible for exemption when used for packing partially skimmed milk powder, and whether duty demand under Rule 196 was sustainable despite the challenge to the notice and assessment procedure.

Analysis: The exemption notification covered metal containers intended for packing skimmed milk powder, and the concession was conditional upon compliance with Chapter X procedure and correct declaration of use. The appellants had declared the goods as skimmed milk powder and obtained the containers on that basis, but the actual use was for packing partially skimmed milk powder, which was held to be a distinct product not covered by the notification. Exemption notifications were required to be construed strictly, and the burden lay on the claimant to show full compliance with the conditions of exemption. The omission to mention Section 11A in the show cause notice did not vitiate the demand, and the duty recovery under Rule 196 remained maintainable.

Conclusion: The appellants were not entitled to exemption for the containers used in packing partially skimmed milk powder, and the duty demand was valid and enforceable.

---