Statutory export agency certificates cannot be disregarded without contrary evidence to deny export obligation compliance.

A statutory export agency's certificate of export quota compliance could not be ignored in the absence of contrary evidence, and the absence of any recorded statement from agency officials meant the Revenue had no basis to dispute fulfillment of the export obligation. On that footing, the duty demand, together with interest and penalty, was unsustainable and was set aside. The operative principle is that unchallenged certificates issued by a competent export agency remain effective evidence of compliance unless displaced by affirmative contrary material.

---

---

Issues: Whether duty was payable on sugar cleared for export on the ground that it was not shown to have been exported through the export agency, and whether the statutory certificates issued by the export agency could be disregarded in the absence of contrary evidence.

Analysis: The export agency had issued certificates stating that the appellant had fulfilled the export quota obligation. Those certificates were not disputed by the Revenue. The lower authorities proceeded on the footing that the sugar had not been delivered to the export agency, but no statement from any official of the export agency was recorded to show that the certificates were issued without receiving the sugar. In the absence of contrary evidence, the certificates issued by the statutory export agency could not be ignored.

Conclusion: The appellant was held to have discharged the export obligation, and the demand of duty, interest, and penalty was set aside.

Final Conclusion: The impugned order was annulled and the appeal succeeded with consequential relief.

Ratio Decidendi: A certificate issued by a statutory export agency, when unchallenged by contrary evidence, cannot be disregarded to deny fulfillment of export obligation and sustain duty demand.

---