ORDER
P.G. Chacko, Member (J)
1. In this appeal filed by the assessee, the short question is whether, for the period from 31.8.1995 to 19.11.1995, the benefit of Notification No. 60/88-CE dated 1.3.1988 as amended by Notification No. 109/95-CE dated 31.8.1995 was deniable to them in respect of newsprint [Heading 48.01 of the CETA Schedule] supplied by them to a registered newspaper through a depot. The lower authorities have denied the benefit on the strength of the amended proviso to Notification No. 60/88-CE. The amended proviso reads as under:
Provided that the exemption contained under this notification shall be admissible only in respect of newsprint, –
(a) manufactured by a manufacturer of newsprint registered under Schedule I of the Newsprint Control Order, 1962; and
(b) supplied against a purchase order placed upon such manufacturer by a newspaper’
Prior to 31.8.1995 [the date of amendment], the proviso was to the effect that the exemption under the Notification would be admissible on such quantities of newsprint as might be authorized by the Registrar of Newspapers of India for the publication of the newspaper and that a certificate to that effect should be produced before the jurisdictional Assistant Collector of Central Excise within the prescribed period. From the amended provisions, the department deciphered that, for the benefit of exemption under the Notification, a manufacturer of newsprint should supply the goods directly to a newspaper against the latter’s purchase order. This view is seen reiterated in the orders of the lower authorities.
2. The appellants had supplied newsprint through their depot to a registered newspaper during the aforesaid period. Their case is that such clearances were permitted in the past also and that the amendment to the Notification did not warrant any change. After hearing both sides, we have to subscribe to the interpretation given by the appellants. The expression “supplied against a purchase order placed upon such manufacturer by a newspaper” does not necessarily mean that the manufacturer should supply newsprint directly to a newspaper. What was intended by the amendment was that the supply of newsprint to a newspaper must be against a purchase order placed by the latter. It could either be direct or through a depot. We have found nothing in the (sic)text of the amended proviso which can be construed as a bar against indirect supply of newsprint by the manufacturer of a newspaper for the purpose of exemption under the Notification.
3. In the above view of the matter, we set aside the impugned order and allow this appeal.
(Dictated and pronounced in open court)