Chartered Accountant
Bookmark and Share
click here to subscribe our newsletter
 
 
Corporate News *   CBIC issues draft rules for Customs valuation *  Top Headlines: Threshold for Benami deals, green bond investors, and more *  Govt aims 1-hour clearance for goods at all ports *  Exporters Allowed To Use RoDTEP, RoSCTL Scrips To Pay Customs Duty, Transfer Them; Rules Amended *  Millions of labourers to be affected by brick producers’ strike over hike in GST, coal rates *  Inauguration of ‘kendriya GST parisar’ *  Transporter can seek Release of Conveyance alone, not Goods under GST Act: Madras HC *  GST: Quoting of DIN Mandatory for Responding to Notice, Govt Modifies Portal *  Firms can soon file claims for GST credits of ?400 cr *  CBIC issues modalities for filing transitional credit under GST. *  Mumbai: Man creates 36 fake GST firms, arrested for input tax credit fraud of Rs 23 cr *  Report to restructure Commerce Ministry under study; idea is to set up trade promotion body: Goyal *  Firms can soon file claims for GST credits of ?400 cr *  Gambling Alert! Govt May Levy Up To 28% GST; UP, Bengal Back Move *  EPFO backs raising retirement age to ease pressure on pension funds *  India Moving Up Power Scale, Set to Become Third Largest Economy By 2030 *  Airfares Get Expensive: What Changes for Flyers From Today? *  IRCTC Latest News: Passengers to Pay More For Cancelling Confirmed Rail Tickets Soon. *  IBC prevails over Customs Act, says Supreme Court. *  As GST enters sixth year, a time for evaluation and reassessment *  There’s GST on daily essentials as Centre needs money to buy MLAs: Arvind Kejriwal *  Now, GST on cancellation of confirmed train tickets, hotel bookings *  GST kitty for top States could rise 20% in FY23, says Crisil *  French customs officials seize another cargo vessel over Russia sanctions *  TradeLens builds on Asia momentum with Pakistan Customs deal *  Hike tax on tobacco, reduce affordability & increase revenue: Civil society organizations to GST council *  Bihar: ?10 crore tax evasion on tobacco products detected in raids *  Centre failed on GST, COVID; would it be anti-national? Rajan on Infosys row *  Service Tax not Chargeable on Income Tax TDS portion paid by recipient: CESTAT grants relief to TVS *  Foreign portfolio investors make net investment of Rs 7575cr in Sep so far
Subject News *  Run-up to Budget: Monetary threshold for GST offences may rise to Rs 25 cr *   GST (Tax) E-invoice Must For Businesses With Over Rs 5 Crore Annual Turnover *   Both Central GST and excise duty can be imposed on tobacco, rules Karnataka high court *   CBIC Issues Clarification On Extended Timelines For GST Compliance *   CBIC Issues Clarification On Extended Timelines For GST Compliance *  Budget 2023- 9.6 crore gas connections *  GST: Tamil Nadu Issues Instructions for Assessment and Adjudication Proceedings *  GST: CBIC Extends Last Date for filing of ITC *  GST collection in September surpasses Rs 1.4 lakh crore for straight seventh time *  Dollar smuggling case: Customs chargesheet names M Sivasankar as key conspirator. *  Hike in GST rates fuels inflation *  Assam: CBI arrests GST commissioner in Guwahati *  GST fraud worth ?824cr by 15 insurance Cos detected *  India proposes 15% customs duties on 22 items imported from UK *  Decriminalising certain offences under GST on cards *  Surge in GST collections more due to higher inflation: India Ratings *  MNRE Notifies BCD and Hike in GST Rates as ‘Change in Law’ Events But With a Condition | Mercom India *   Solar projects awarded before customs duty change allowed cost pass-through *  Rajasthan High Court Dismisses Writ Petitions Challenging Levy Of GST On Royalty *   GST revenue in September likely at Rs 1.45 lakh crore *  Govt working on decriminalising certain offences under GST, lower compounding charge *  Building an institution like GST Council takes time, trashing is easy: Sitharaman *  GST collections in Sept may touch ?1.5 lakh crore *  KTR asks Centre to withdraw GST on handlooms *  After Gameskraft, More Online Gaming Startups To Receive GST Tax Claims *  Madras HC: AAR Application Filed Under VAT Does Not Survive After GST Enactment *  Threshold for criminal offences under GST law may be raised *  Bengaluru: Gaming company faces biggest GST notice of Rs 21,000 crore *  CBIC clarifies Classification of Cranes for GST, Customs Duty *  Customs seize gold hidden in bicycle in Kerala airport  

Comments

Print   |    |  Comment

PJ/CASE STUDY/2011-12/50
03 April 2014

Interpretation of Exemption Notification
PJ/Case Study/2011-12/50

CASE STUDY

Prepared By:
CA Pradeep Jain
Sukhvinder Kaur LLB [FYIC]

Introduction:-
 
In the case under study, the issue raised before the Apex Court was regarding the interpretation of Exemption Notification. Whether the Notification granting exemption should be interpreted strictly or liberally?     

Commissioner of Customs (Import), Mumbai v/s M/s Konkan Synthetic Fibres
[2012-TIOL-29-SC-CUS]

Brief Facts:-
 
- Respondent-assessee is an importer. It imported one unit of equipment which was declared as “Kari Mayer High Speed Draw Warping Machine with 1536 ends along with essential spares”. On import, assessee presented Bill of Entry dated 25.09.2001 before Customs Authorities, inter alia, seeking clearance of the same by extending the benefit of Notification No. 17/01-Cus dated 01.03.2001, as amended by Notification No. 44/01-Cus dated 26.04.2001.
 
- The Customs Authorities refused to accept the request of the assessee and accordingly directed the assessee to pay duty under the provisions of the Customs Act, 1962.
 
- The assessee was thus constrained to pay duty in order to clear the goods. They paid under protest so that they could file appeal before the First Appellate Authority.
 
- In appeal, the First Appellate Authority confirmed the view of the Customs Authority.
 
- Aggrieved assessee filed appeal before the Tribunal.  
   
- The Tribunal granted relief to the assessee by giving a liberal interpretation to the beneficial Notification No. 17/01-Cus dated 01.03.2001 as amended by Notification No. 44/01-Cus dated 26.04.2001.
 
- Against the decision of the Tribunal, Revenue has come up in appeal before the Supreme Court.
 
Appellant’s Contention:-  
 
- Revenue referring to Notification under which assessee claimed benefit for the imported goods contended that what was imported by the assessee was not in consonance with the exemption notification and, therefore, the authorities under Act were justified in denying the benefit available under the Notification to the assessee.
 
- It was submitted that what is imported by the assessee is High Speed Draw Warping Machine with yard tensioning without the pneumatic suction device but with a drawing machine. Since what was imported is not in accordance with Entry 8 of the table appended to the Notification, the assessee is not entitled to the benefit of the exemption notification.  
 
Respondent’s Contention:-  
 
- Assessee submitted that beneficial notification should be given a liberal construction and if it is done, then, what is imported by the assessee would fall within Entry 8 of the table appended to the exemption notification
 
Reasoning of the Supreme Court:-
 
- The Apex Court noted that the Central Government, in exercise of its power under Section 25 (1) of the Act, has issued an exemption notification in public interest, exempting certain articles notified under the table appended to the Notification from payment of the duty under the Act. Several items are enumerated under the table. Entry 130 of the table speaks of drawing machine. Entry 8 of the Notification speaks of the High Speed Warping machine with yarn tensioning, pneumatic suction devices and accessories. A reading of the said entry would indicate that the said machine is a composite machine. The pneumatic suction devices are machines used for the purpose of sucking of vapour/gas, while the High Speed warping machine is activated or warped.
 
- It was observed that there is no dispute that the assessee has imported High speed warping machine but without pneumatic suction device, but with drawing unit. The Textile Commissioner, who is well conversant with these machines, has stated vide his letter dated 27.09.2001 that the goods imported by the assessee are covered under Entry-8 of the Table appended to the Notification. He further stated vide his letter dated 24.10.2001 that drawing unit is just an essential accessory to the machines imported by assessee and therefore, is covered under said Entry. The opinion so furnished is taken note of by the Tribunal while granting relief to the assessee.
 
- The Supreme Court stated that it is a settled proposition in a fiscal or taxation law that while ascertaining the scope or expression used in a particular entry, the opinion of the expert in the field of trade, who deals in those goods, should not be ignored, rather it should be given due importance. The Court referred to observation given in the case of Collector of Customs v/s Swatic Woollens (P) Ltd [1988 Supp SCC 796] that:
 
“4. We are of the opinion that when no statutory definition is provided in respect of an item in the Customs Act or the Central Excises Act, the trade understanding in the opinion of those who deal with the goods in question is the safest guide. See Union of India v/s Delhi Cloth & General Mills, South Bihar Sugar Mills Ltd. v/s Union of India, Dunlop India Ltd v/s Union of India, In re Colgate Palmolive (India) Pvt Ltd, CST v/s S. N. Bros, Kanpur, and also the famous observations of Justice Cameron in His majesty The King v/s Planters Nut and Choclate Co. Ltd.”
 
- The Court stated that before deciding the issue, it is required to notice how the Supreme Court has construed beneficial notifications issued under the Act.
 
In Commissioner of Customs (Preventive), Mumbai v/s M. Ambalal and Company [2010-TIOL-111-SC-CUS] it was observed that the beneficial notification providing the levy of duty at a concessional rate should be given a liberal interpretation:
 
“16. It is settled law that the notification has to be read as a whole. If any of the conditions laid down in the notification is not fulfilled, the party is not entitled to the benefit of that notification. The rule regarding exemptions is that exemptions should generally be strictly interpreted but beneficial exemptions having their purpose as encouragement or promotion of certain activities should be liberally interpreted. This composite rule is not stated in any particular judgment in so many words. In fact, majority of judgments emphasize that exemptions are to be strictly interpreted while some of them insist that exemptions in fiscal Statutes are to be liberally interpreted giving an apparent impression that they are contradictory to each other. But this is only apparent. A close scrutiny will reveal that there is no real contradiction amongst the judgments at all. The synthesis of the views is quite clearly that the general rule is strict interpretation while special rule in the case of beneficial and promotional exemption is liberal interpretation. The two go very well with each other because they relate to two different sets of circumstances.”
 
- In Commissioner of sales tax v/s Industrial Coal Enterprises [(1999) 2 SCC 607], this Court has observed:   
 
“11. In CIT v/s Straw Board Mfg. Co. Ltd, this Court held that in taxing statutes, provision for concessional rate of tax should be liberally construed. So also in Bajaj Tempo Ltd v/s CIT it was held that provision granting incentive for promoting economic growth and development in taxing statutes should liberally construed and restriction placed on it by way of exception should be construed in a reasonable and purposive manner so as to advance the objective of the provision.”.
 
- In Commissioner of Central Excise, Shillong v/s North Eastern Tobacco Co. Ltd [(2003) 1 SCC 161] this Court has held:
 
“10. The other important principle of interpreting an exemption notification is that as far as possible liberal interpretation should be imparted to the language thereof, provided no violence is done to the language employed.”
 
- In AssociatedCement Companies Ltd v/s State of Bihar [(2004) 7 SCC 642], this Court while explaining the nature of the exemption notification and also the manner in which it should be interpreted has held:
 
“12. Literally “exemption” is freedom from liability, tax or duty. Fiscally it may assume varying shapes, specially, in a growing economy. In fact, an exemption provision is like an exception and on normal principle of construction or interpretation of statutes it is construed strictly either because of legislative intention or on economic justification of inequitable burden of progressive approach of fiscal provisions intended to augment State revenue. But once exception or exemption becomes applicable no rule or principle requires it to be construed strictly. Truly speaking, liberal and strict construction of an exemption provision is to be invoked at different stages of interpreting it. When the question is whether a subject falls in the notification or in the exemption clause then it being in the nature of exception is to be construed strictly and against the subject but once ambiguity or doubt about applicability is lifted and the subject falls in the notification then full play should be given to it and it calls for a wider and liberal construction. (See Union of India v/s Wood Papers Ltd and Mangalore Chemicals and Fertilisers Ltd v/s Dy. Commr. of Commercial taxes to which reference has been made earlier.)”
 
- In G. P. Ceramics Private Limited v/s Commissioner, Trade Tax, Uttar Pradesh [(2009) 2 SCC 90], this Court has observed thus:
 
“29. It is now a well-established principle of law that whereas eligibility criteria laid down in an exemption notification are required to be construed strictly, once it is found that the applicant satisfies the same, the exemption notification should be construed liberally. [See CTT v/s DSM Group of Industries (SCC paras 26); TISCO v/s State of Jharkhand (SCC paras 42 to 45); State Level Committee v/s Morgardshammar India Ltd; Novopan India Ltd v/s CCE & Customs; A. P. Steel Re-Rolling Mill Ltd v/s State of Kerala and Reiz Electrocontrols (P) Ltd v/s CCE].”   
  
In the end, the Court held that since the Tribunal has taken note of the correct principles enunciated by this Court while granting relief to the assessee, the Supreme Court cannot find fault with the impugned judgment.
 
Decision of the Supreme Court:-
 
Appeal rejected.
 
Conclusion:-
 
Thus, two aspects have emerged while interpreting a Notification granting Exemption: - Firstly, while deciding that whether exemption will be available or not i.e. the eligibility of applicant for claiming exemption, then the Notification is required to be interpreted strictly.
 
Secondly, once it is decided that the applicant is eligible to claim exemption benefit under a Notification, then for grant of exemption benefit, the Notification is to be construed liberally and not in a narrow manner. This judgment is very much helpful to the assessee claiming benefit of exemption who although are eligible and covered under exemption Notification but their claim is being denied because one or two conditions of the Notification are not fulfilled.

******

Department News


Query

 
PRADEEP JAIN, F.C.A.

Head Office : -

Address :
"SUGYAN", H - 29, SHASTRI NAGAR, JODHPUR (RAJ.) - 342003

Phone No. :
0291 - 2439496, 0291 - 3258496

Mobile No. :
09314722236

Fax No. :0291 - 2439496


Branch Office : -

Address:
1008, 10th FLOOR, SUKH SAGAR COMPLEX,
NEAR FORTUNE LANDMARK HOTEL, USMANPURA,
ASHRAM ROAD, AHMEDABAD-380013

Phone No. :
079-32999496, 27560043

Mobile No. :
093777659496, 09377649496

E-mail :pradeep@capradeepjain.com