https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=45928 On a plain reading of Notification No. 11/97-Cus. dated 1-3-1997 and its related entries, the SC found that the differing use of qualifying words in one entry and their absence in another showed that the concessional benefit was not intended to be narrowed in the way argued by the Revenue. Reading the notification in comparative context, the Court found no infirmity in the Tribunal's interpretation of its scope and applicability. The challenge therefore failed, and the notification was held to apply in favour of the respondent's imports. en-us Thu, 03 May 2001 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 14 Jul 2010 16:05:43 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=45928 On a plain reading of Notification No. 11/97-Cus. dated 1-3-1997 and its related entries, the SC found that the differing use of qualifying words in one entry and their absence in another showed that the concessional benefit was not intended to be narrowed in the way argued by the Revenue. Reading the notification in comparative context, the Court found no infirmity in the Tribunal's interpretation of its scope and applicability. The challenge therefore failed, and the notification was held to apply in favour of the respondent's imports. Case-Laws Customs Thu, 03 May 2001 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=45928