https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=760955 Exemption under Sr. No. 108(1) of Notification No. 23/98-Cus. could not be denied for failure to produce an end-use certificate, because the entry itself imposed no such condition. A circular cannot add a requirement that is absent from the notification, and to that extent a departmental circular inconsistent with the notification is impermissible. The goods were also shown to have been sold to leather manufacturers, supporting use in the leather industry. The practical effect is that the exemption remained available and denial solely for want of an end-use certificate was unjustified. en-us Fri, 25 Oct 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 30 Oct 2024 08:32:35 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=760955 Exemption under Sr. No. 108(1) of Notification No. 23/98-Cus. could not be denied for failure to produce an end-use certificate, because the entry itself imposed no such condition. A circular cannot add a requirement that is absent from the notification, and to that extent a departmental circular inconsistent with the notification is impermissible. The goods were also shown to have been sold to leather manufacturers, supporting use in the leather industry. The practical effect is that the exemption remained available and denial solely for want of an end-use certificate was unjustified. Case-Laws Customs Fri, 25 Oct 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=760955