Project import benefit requires proof of initial setting up of a specified project; related development use is not enough.

Project import benefit under Heading 84.66 was denied because the importer failed to prove that the goods formed part of the initial setting up of a specified or notified project. The materials showed that the imports were for a Frozen Semen Bank in a Bull Breeding Farm, but no project report was produced and the stated use was for extraction and preservation of semen rather than for manufacture or project setup within the tariff heading. Inconsistent application and hearing submissions further undermined the claim. Assessment on merits was therefore upheld.

---

---

Issues: Whether the imported goods were eligible for project import benefit under Heading 84.66 as equipment for the initial setting up of a specified or notified project.

Analysis: The claimed benefit depended on satisfaction of the conditions of Heading 84.66 and proof that the import formed part of a specified or notified project for initial setting up. The materials showed that the goods were imported for a Frozen Semen Bank in a Bull Breeding Farm, that the appellant had not produced a project report, and that the items were in fact required for extraction and preservation of semen, not for manufacture or for initial setting up of a project covered by the heading. The application and the hearing submissions were found to be inconsistent, and the claimed use of the goods did not bring them within the tariff heading.

Conclusion: The goods were not entitled to project import treatment under Heading 84.66, and assessment on merits was upheld against the appellant.

Ratio Decidendi: Project import benefit is available only when the importer proves that the goods are for the initial setting up of a specified or notified project satisfying the tariff conditions; a mere connection with a larger development programme is insufficient.

---