Exemption notification for footwear components cannot be denied merely because minor rubber sheets are affixed.

An exemption notification for footwear components was read broadly because it granted relief to specified heels and soles without using limiting words such as "exclusive", "wholly" or "alone". The addition of a small amount of rubber sheets did not defeat the exemption where the goods otherwise answered the notified description. On that approach, the denial of exemption on the heels and soles was found unsustainable; the related duty demand was set aside, while the separate sample-shoes issue was left undisturbed and the penalty was reduced.

---

---

Issues: Whether exemption under Notification No. 49/86-C.E. dated 10-2-1986 was available to heels and soles of footwear made substantially of wood or leather but with rubber sheets affixed to them.

Analysis: The exemption notification granted unconditional relief to specified component parts of footwear and did not use restrictive expressions such as "exclusive", "wholly" or "alone". The presence of a small additional material, namely rubber sheets, could not by itself defeat the exemption when the goods otherwise answered the description in the notification. In such a case, the notification had to be read broadly, and exemption could not be denied merely because of the added material.

Conclusion: The denial of exemption on the heels and soles was unsustainable and the assessee succeeded on this issue.

Final Conclusion: The duty demand relating to the exemption issue was set aside, the unpressed sample-shoes issue was not interfered with, and the penalty was reduced.

Ratio Decidendi: Where an exemption notification does not impose an express condition of exclusivity, the presence of a minor additional material does not defeat the exemption if the goods otherwise conform to the notified description.

---