Conditional customs exemption turns on goods as assessed, with only non-semiconductor parts qualifying under the notification.

For exemption under a conditional customs notification, goods must be examined as presented for assessment, and only items meeting the notification's express eligibility criteria can receive the benefit. Although the imported consignment in SKD condition could be treated as a complete unit for classification, exemption depended on whether each identifiable part contained the excluded semi-conductor devices. The parts without such devices were treated as eligible under Notification No. 349/86, requiring reassessment on separate values, while the journal printer mechanism admittedly containing semi-conductor devices was outside the exemption and ineligible.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether parts imported in SKD condition, some of which contained semi-conductor devices and some of which did not, were eligible to exemption under Notification No. 349/86; (ii) Whether a journal printer mechanism admittedly containing semi-conductor devices was eligible to the same exemption.

Issue (i): Whether parts imported in SKD condition, some of which contained semi-conductor devices and some of which did not, were eligible to exemption under Notification No. 349/86.

Analysis: For classification purposes, the imported consignment could be treated as a complete unit under Rule 2(a) of the General Rules for the Interpretation of the First Schedule to the Customs Tariff Act, 1975. For exemption, however, the relevant inquiry was the condition of the goods as presented for assessment. The notification excluded only those parts containing specified electronic components. Since the record showed that only certain sub-assemblies contained semi-conductor devices, those items were outside the exemption, while the remaining parts, being separately identifiable parts without such devices, could qualify under the notification. The matter required reassessment on the basis of separate values for the eligible parts.

Conclusion: The parts not containing semi-conductor devices were held eligible to exemption under Notification No. 349/86, and the matter was remanded for de novo decision.

Issue (ii): Whether a journal printer mechanism admittedly containing semi-conductor devices was eligible to the same exemption.

Analysis: The item was admitted to consist of semi-conductor devices and no other parts. In view of the express exclusion in the notification, the goods did not satisfy the conditions for exemption.

Conclusion: The claim to exemption was rejected for the journal printer mechanism.

Final Conclusion: The decision granted exemption only to the eligible non-semiconductor parts and denied it to the journal printer mechanism, with consequential remand in one matter and rejection in the other.

Ratio Decidendi: For exemption under a conditional notification, the goods must be examined in the condition in which they are presented for assessment, and only those components that satisfy the notification's express eligibility criteria can receive the benefit.

---