Exemption under Notification No. 83/83 cannot be denied solely for missing declaration; eligibility still depends on notification conditions.

Non-filing of the prescribed declaration and absence of prior departmental approval did not, by itself, justify denial of exemption under Notification No. 83/83 where the benefit was otherwise available in law. The Tribunal treated the declaration lapse as insufficient on its own and held that entitlement depended on whether the clearances satisfied the notification conditions. As the factual verification of those conditions was still required, the matter was remanded for departmental examination and extension of the exemption if the prescribed limits were met.

---

---

Issues: Whether benefit of exemption under Notification No. 83/83 could be denied merely because the assessee had not filed the required declaration and obtained prior departmental approval.

Analysis: The dispute concerned denial of exemption on the ground of non-declaration, even though the clearances of the specified goods were stated to be within the prescribed limit. The Tribunal accepted that non-filing of the declaration, by itself, should not lead to denial of the exemption where the benefit was otherwise available in law. It also noted that the question whether the clearances satisfied the notification conditions required verification by the departmental authority.

Conclusion: The assessee was held entitled to claim the exemption under Notification No. 83/83, and the matter was remanded for verification and extension of the benefit.

---