https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=254233 CVD exemption under Notification No. 6/2002-CE was denied because the imported resins and gelcoat did not fall within the specified 8-digit tariff items in List 9A, and exemption notifications were required to be strictly construed. The later amendment extending benefit to additional items was held prospective and could not cover the disputed imports. The importer also failed to produce the prescribed essentiality certificate before clearance, and that certificate was an independent mandatory condition for exemption. As both the classification requirement and the certificate condition were not satisfied, the exemption claim failed and the denial of relief was upheld. en-us Tue, 02 Dec 2014 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 09 Feb 2016 11:14:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=254233 CVD exemption under Notification No. 6/2002-CE was denied because the imported resins and gelcoat did not fall within the specified 8-digit tariff items in List 9A, and exemption notifications were required to be strictly construed. The later amendment extending benefit to additional items was held prospective and could not cover the disputed imports. The importer also failed to produce the prescribed essentiality certificate before clearance, and that certificate was an independent mandatory condition for exemption. As both the classification requirement and the certificate condition were not satisfied, the exemption claim failed and the denial of relief was upheld. Case-Laws Customs Tue, 02 Dec 2014 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=254233