Exemption notification construction protects stainless steel tubes where no express exclusion appears in the text.

Stainless steel tubes were treated as covered by Notification No. 202/88 because an exemption notification must be construed by its express language, and exclusion cannot be implied where stainless steel is not specifically carved out. The Tribunal rejected the Revenue's attempt to distinguish steel from stainless steel by tariff notes, market understanding, and price difference, holding that where the legislative scheme intends exclusion, it states so expressly. On that construction, stainless steel tubes remained eligible for the exemption and the Revenue's appeal failed.

---

---

Issues: Whether stainless steel tubes were eligible for the benefit of Notification No. 202/88 dated 20-5-1988.

Analysis: The eligibility turned on the construction of the exemption notification. The Revenue sought to distinguish steel from stainless steel by reference to tariff notes, market understanding, and price difference. The Tribunal upheld the view that, where the legislature intended to exclude stainless steel from exemption, it did so expressly, and in the absence of a specific exclusion stainless steel tubes could not be denied the benefit merely on a broad distinction between steel and stainless steel.

Conclusion: Stainless steel tubes were held to be covered by the notification and the Revenue's appeal was rejected.

Ratio Decidendi: In construing an exemption notification, a product cannot be excluded by implication when the notification does not expressly exclude it and the legislative scheme shows that exclusion, where intended, is stated specifically.

---