Fly ash brick exemption sustained where ER-4 disclosure was accepted as compliance in absence of a prescribed form.

Fly ash brick exemption under Notification No. 06/2002-CE could not be denied where the required information was filed in ER-4 returns and no separate prescribed form had been notified during the relevant period. The notification contemplated submission in the manner prescribed by the jurisdictional Commissioner, but since no such form was available, ER-4 disclosure was treated as sufficient compliance. The record also showed use of more than 40% fly ash in manufacture, supporting the exemption claim. The demand was therefore held unsustainable.

---

---

Issues: Whether the appellant was entitled to exemption on fly ash bricks when the information required under Condition No. 36 of Notification No. 06/2002-CE was furnished in ER-4 return instead of in a separate prescribed form.

Analysis: The exemption notification required the jurisdictional Commissioner to notify the manner in which the prescribed information was to be submitted. No such prescribed form had been made available during the disputed period. The appellant maintained the relevant record in ER-4 returns, and the record showed use of more than 40% fly ash in the manufacture of bricks. In these circumstances, the information furnished in ER-4 was treated as sufficient compliance with the notification condition.

Conclusion: The demand was not sustainable and the exemption could not be denied on the ground of non-furnishing of information in the absent prescribed form.

---