Exemption notification cannot be denied on an unstated restriction where supplier availed proforma credit under Rule 56A.

An exemption notification was interpreted according to its express terms, and the mere fact that aluminium circles used as inputs had been cleared through RG 23 Part-II under Rule 56A did not create an implied disqualification. The supplier's use of proforma credit under Rule 56A did not, by itself, affect eligibility for Notification No. 271/82 because the notification contained no restriction to that effect. The denial of the notification benefit was therefore unsustainable, and relief followed in favour of the assessee.

---

---

Issues: Whether aluminium containers were entitled to assessment benefit under Notification No. 271/82 when the aluminium circles used as inputs had been cleared on duty through RG 23 Part-II account under Rule 56A.

Analysis: The dispute turned on the scope of Notification No. 271/82. The notification did not prescribe any condition excluding inputs merely because duty had been discharged through RG 23 Part-II account by the supplier. The fact that the supplier had availed Rule 56A procedure did not alter the eligibility of the inputs for the notification. The reliance placed on the cited case law was found not applicable on the facts of the present matter.

Conclusion: The denial of the notification benefit was unsustainable and the issue was decided in favour of the assessee.

Final Conclusion: The impugned order was set aside and the appellant obtained the consequential relief flowing from the allowance of the appeal.

Ratio Decidendi: An exemption notification cannot be read to deny its benefit on a ground not expressly provided in its terms, and the supplier's availing of proforma credit does not by itself disqualify the inputs where the notification imposes no such restriction.

---