https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=389852 Reimported goods used for repacking of pharmaceuticals were held not to fall within Notification No. 52/2003-Cus, because repacking was treated as manufacture rather than repair or reconditioning. The Tribunal applied strict construction of exemption notifications, relied on dictionary meanings of repair and reconditioning, and noted that activities amounting to manufacture cannot be brought within the exemption. It also considered the CBEC circular cited by the importer but found no basis to extend the benefit where the process created a manufacturing result. The exemption claim was therefore rejected and the customs duty demand sustained. en-us Wed, 20 Nov 2019 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 07 Nov 2020 18:28:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=389852 Reimported goods used for repacking of pharmaceuticals were held not to fall within Notification No. 52/2003-Cus, because repacking was treated as manufacture rather than repair or reconditioning. The Tribunal applied strict construction of exemption notifications, relied on dictionary meanings of repair and reconditioning, and noted that activities amounting to manufacture cannot be brought within the exemption. It also considered the CBEC circular cited by the importer but found no basis to extend the benefit where the process created a manufacturing result. The exemption claim was therefore rejected and the customs duty demand sustained. Case-Laws Customs Wed, 20 Nov 2019 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=389852