Exemption notification benefit preserved despite delayed intimation where the lapse was treated as technical, not substantive.

Exemption under Notification No. 6/2000-C.E. could not be denied merely because intimation to the department was delayed and some initial clearances had already been made on payment of duty. The assessee received the notification belatedly, paid duty on part of the clearances, and thereafter claimed the concession with the department's knowledge. The discrepancy was treated as a technical lapse rather than a substantive breach, so the exemption remained available and the Revenue's objection failed.

---

---

Issues: Whether the assessee could be denied the benefit of Notification No. 6/2000-C.E. on the ground that the intimation to the department was delayed and the initial clearances had already been made on payment of duty.

Analysis: The assessee had received the notification belatedly, had already cleared part of the goods on payment of duty, and for the remaining period availed the concession with the knowledge of the departmental authorities. The discrepancy was treated as a technical lapse and not as a substantive violation warranting denial of exemption.

Conclusion: The exemption benefit was rightly allowed to the assessee and the Revenue's challenge failed.

---