1995 (6) TMI 94 - AT - Customs

Summary

Issues:
1. Eligibility for concessional rate of duty under Notification 20/88.
2. Requirement of compliance with conditions at the time of clearance.
3. Interpretation of substantive and procedural conditions for exemption.
4. Consideration of DGTD Certificate and Modvat credit in determining eligibility for exemption.

Analysis:

Issue 1: Eligibility for concessional rate of duty under Notification 20/88
The appellants imported transformer press board and claimed a refund based on Notification 20/88 for concessional duty. However, the claim was rejected as they did not produce the DGTD certificate at the time of clearance, a prerequisite for eligibility under the notification.

Issue 2: Requirement of compliance with conditions at the time of clearance
The Collector of Customs & Central Excise (Appeals) upheld the rejection, emphasizing the mandatory nature of conditions like producing the DGTD certificate and giving an undertaking at the time of clearance. Failure to disclose intention for exemption at clearance was a crucial point in the decision.

Issue 3: Interpretation of substantive and procedural conditions for exemption
The appellants argued that they had the DGTD certificate at the time of import, even though it was not submitted in time. They contended that the substantive condition of using the goods for manufacturing transformers was met, supported by Modvat credit, rendering procedural conditions dispensable.

Issue 4: Consideration of DGTD Certificate and Modvat credit
The DGTD certificate confirmed the intended use of the imported material for transformer manufacturing. The grant of Modvat credit further substantiated the actual use of the material, leading to the conclusion that substantive conditions for exemption were fulfilled, justifying a liberal interpretation of the notification.

In conclusion, the Tribunal set aside the impugned order, holding that the press board imported was eligible for exemption under Notification 20/88. The appellants were granted relief subject to verification of duty incidence and Modvat credit. The decision emphasized the importance of substantive conditions over procedural ones in determining eligibility for duty exemptions under relevant notifications.