Strict construction of exemption notification denied concessional customs duty for a motion picture printer outside the printing industry.

Concessional customs duty was denied for an imported RD Continuous Wet/Dry Motion Picture Printer 35 mm because it did not fall within Notification No. 81/94-Cus. as an automatic film processor for use in the printing industry. The goods were described as a motion picture printer for cinematography, and the importer was engaged in film production, not the printing industry. The distinction between a cinematographic printer and an automatic film processor was treated as material, and the notification could not be expanded beyond its express terms. The Larger Bench classification distinction did not assist on the exemption question, so the concessional benefit was unavailable.

---

---

Issues: Whether the imported RD Continuous Wet/Dry Motion Picture Printer 35 mm was eligible for concessional duty under Notification No. 81/94-Cus. as an automatic film processor for use in the printing industry.

Analysis: The imported goods were described in the invoice and technical literature as a motion picture printer used in cinematography, while the notification granted concession only to an automatic film processor for use in the printing industry. The respondent was engaged in film production and not in the printing industry. The difference between a printer used in cinematography and an automatic film processor used in printing industry was material, and the notification could not be enlarged beyond its express terms. Commercial understanding of the term "printing industry" required the importer itself to fall within that industry, which was not shown here. The distinction drawn by the Larger Bench on classification did not assist the respondent on the exemption issue.

Conclusion: The imported item did not satisfy the notification entry and the concessional benefit was not available to the respondent.

---