Proof of export must be shown by actual evidence within time; filing refund claims alone is not enough.

Rule 14A of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 requires an exporter to produce proof of export within six months; mere lodging of refund claims with the refund authority does not satisfy that requirement. Actual export must be proved to the satisfaction of the jurisdictional central excise authority, and if proof is not produced within the prescribed time, duty becomes recoverable on written demand and penalty may follow. On the facts stated, the assessee did not establish timely proof of export, so relief granted in appeal was based on an incorrect premise and was set aside.

---

---

Issues: Whether mere lodging of claims with the refund authority was sufficient compliance with the requirement to produce proof of export within six months under Rule 14A of the Central Excise Rules, 1944.

Analysis: Rule 14A required the exporter to produce proof of export within the stipulated period, failing which duty became recoverable on written demand and penalty could follow. The mere filing of claims with the refund authority did not amount to proof that the goods had actually been exported to the satisfaction of the jurisdictional central excise authority. Since the assessee did not establish actual export within time, the reduction granted in appeal proceeded on an incorrect basis.

Conclusion: The requirement of proof of export was not satisfied by mere lodging of refund claims, and the order granting relief to the assessee was set aside.

Final Conclusion: The original demand and penalty were restored and the Revenue's appeal succeeded.

Ratio Decidendi: Compliance with a statutory requirement to produce proof of export must be established by actual proof of export within the prescribed time, and not by mere filing of claims or documents before a refund authority.

---