Strict construction of exemption notification bars refund where bills of entry were filed before the notification took effect.

The date relevant for determination of customs duty under section 15(1)(a) is the date of presentation of the bill of entry, not the date of payment of duty. An exemption order using the phrase "to be imported" must be construed strictly according to its wording, so its benefit did not extend to goods for which bills of entry had already been filed before the notification was issued. The refund claim was therefore not maintainable and the appeal failed.

---

---

Issues: Whether the appellants were entitled to refund under the adhoc exemption order when the bills of entry had been filed before the notification though duty was paid and clearance was obtained thereafter.

Analysis: The date relevant for determination of duty under section 15(1)(a) is the date of presentation of the bill of entry, not the date of payment of duty. The exemption order used the expression "to be imported", and exemption notifications must be construed strictly according to their wording. On that basis, the benefit could not extend to goods in respect of which the bills of entry had already been filed before the notification was issued.

Conclusion: The refund claim was not maintainable and the appeal failed.

---