2000 (1) TMI 285

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... for the Appellant. Shri A. Ashokan, JDR, for the Respondents. [Order per : Gowri Shankar, Member (T)]. The question for determination in this appeal is eligibility to Notification 207/88 (till it was amended to 63/91 on 20-5-1991) to parts of saw blades manufactured by the appellant. The notification as it stood before the amendment exempted handsaws and blades for saws of all kinds .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ng the goods exempted by the notification are identical in words in terms with the goods specified in heading 82.02 of the Tariff as it stand to. The parts of these goods were classifiable within the same heading. These includes parts of these goods classifiable in the same heading and the subsequent amendment is clarificatory and therefore retrospective. 4. The departmental representative point .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... tally, does not justify the conclusion that parts would (in the absence of chapter note) be classifiable under heading and be covered by the notification. It is also settled law that the provisions of the notes to a chapter in the Tariff cannot be applied in construing the exemption notification. As the notification stood (before it was amended) it cannot be concluded that it included parts of sa .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X