https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=117017 Notification No. 11/97-Cus. was construed on its plain wording to make eligibility depend on the alcoholic strength of the imported flavouring extract itself, not on the strength of the beverage later manufactured in India. Because the imported goods contained 63.2% alcoholic content, they fell outside the notification's threshold. The argument that the test should be applied by reference to the end-product was rejected, as the exclusion was tied to the imported compound alcoholic preparation. The benefit of the notification was therefore denied and basic customs duty was upheld at the tariff rate. en-us Fri, 23 Sep 2005 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 19 Jun 2012 15:48:08 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=117017 Notification No. 11/97-Cus. was construed on its plain wording to make eligibility depend on the alcoholic strength of the imported flavouring extract itself, not on the strength of the beverage later manufactured in India. Because the imported goods contained 63.2% alcoholic content, they fell outside the notification's threshold. The argument that the test should be applied by reference to the end-product was rejected, as the exclusion was tied to the imported compound alcoholic preparation. The benefit of the notification was therefore denied and basic customs duty was upheld at the tariff rate. Case-Laws Customs Fri, 23 Sep 2005 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=117017