Exemption claim under Notification No. 118/80 required technical scrutiny, leading to remand for fresh adjudication.

Claim for exemption under Notification No. 118/80 was found to have been noted by the lower authority but not actually decided, making the adjudication incomplete. Because the goods were said to be specialised, coverage under Sl. No. 47 required technical examination and, if necessary, expert opinion. The matter was remanded for de novo consideration of the exemption claim after giving the appellant a hearing and allowing expert evidence if required. The alternate plea for classification under Tariff Heading 90.28 was not pressed, and no finding was altered on that abandoned issue.

---

---

Issues: Whether the appellant was entitled to consideration of its claim for the benefit of Notification No. 118/80 dated 19-6-1980 in respect of the goods classified under Tariff Heading 84.51/55, and whether the matter required remand for fresh adjudication.

Analysis: The alternate plea for classification under Tariff Heading 90.28 was not pressed. On the remaining question, the record showed that the claim for exemption under Notification No. 118/80 had been noted but not decided by the lower authority. As the goods were stated to be specialised in nature, their coverage under Sl. No. 47 of the notification required technical examination and, if necessary, expert opinion. The absence of such consideration rendered the adjudication incomplete.

Conclusion: The matter was remanded for de novo consideration of the claim under Notification No. 118/80 after affording the appellant an opportunity of hearing and permitting expert evidence if required.

Final Conclusion: The appeal succeeded only to the extent of securing a fresh adjudication on the exemption claim, while the existing classification finding was left undisturbed insofar as the abandoned alternate plea was concerned.

---