Certification requirement under exemption notification treated substantively, so benefit could not be denied for wrong-designated State officer.

Notification No. 23/89-C.E. required certification of specified parameters by the Director of Industries of the State Government or the Development Commissioner for Cement in the Government of India. The Tribunal treated a certificate issued by the Joint Commissioner of Industries as sufficient where the substantive certification requirement was met, and held that the absence of the exact designation in the State machinery was not fatal. On that basis, exemption benefit under the notification could not be denied merely because the certificate came from a different State officer.

---

---

Issues: Whether the benefit of Notification No. 23/89-C.E. dated 1-3-1989 could be denied merely because the certificate was issued by the Joint Commissioner of Industries instead of the authority described in the notification.

Analysis: The notification required certification of specified parameters by the Director of Industries of the State Government or by the Development Commissioner for Cement in the Government of India. The assessees produced a certificate from the Joint Commissioner of Industries. The Tribunal followed its earlier view on an identical problem and treated the defect as not fatal where the substance of the certification requirement was met. On that approach, the absence of the exact designation in the State machinery did not deprive the assessees of the exemption benefit.

Conclusion: The certificate was accepted for the purpose of the notification and the exemption benefit could not be denied on this ground.

---