Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether the declaration contemplated by Notification No. 80/80-CE dated 19-6-1980 was mandatory for availing the exemption, and whether the appellants' correspondence could be treated as sufficient compliance with that requirement.
Analysis: The notification made the exemption available only to a manufacturer who filed a declaration. Although the notification did not prescribe the time or form of the declaration, the declaration had to convey that the aggregate value of clearances during the financial year was not likely to exceed the stipulated limit. The appellants' initial letter did not contain that specific declaration, but their later letter, received during the relevant financial year, contained the essential information in substance. Since a simple letter satisfying the requirements of the notification would have served the purpose, the later communication was treated as meeting the object of the declaration requirement.
Conclusion: The declaration requirement was treated as sufficiently complied with, and the appeal succeeded in favour of the appellants.
Ratio Decidendi: Where an exemption notification requires a declaration but does not prescribe its form or time, a communication filed in the relevant financial year that substantially conveys the required declaration may satisfy the condition.