Exemption notification benefit cannot be denied on a mere technical lapse; factual entitlement must be re-examined on remand.

Exemption under Notification No. 118/75 could not be denied merely because prior permission had not been obtained before the disputed despatches. The Government held that the factual entitlement had to be examined afresh on the basis of account books and other evidence to determine whether the goods invoiced were actually removed for use in the manufacturer's other units at the stated places. The matter was remitted for de novo adjudication, with directions to allow the notification benefit if the factual conditions were satisfied.

---

---

Issues: Whether the assessee was entitled to the benefit of Exemption Notification No. 118/75 dated 30-4-1975 despite not obtaining prior permission before the disputed despatches.

Analysis: The Government found force in the assessee's contention that the benefit of the exemption could not be denied on a mere technical ground of absence of prior permission. It held that the Assistant Collector should reconsider the matter afresh and examine the account books and other evidence to ascertain whether the goods invoiced were in fact removed for use in the manufacturer's other units at the stated places.

Conclusion: The assessee's claim to exemption was accepted in principle, and the matter was sent back for de novo adjudication with directions to grant the notification benefit if the factual conditions were satisfied.

Final Conclusion: The order afforded relief to the assessee by rejecting a purely technical denial of exemption and remitting the matter for fresh decision on facts.

Ratio Decidendi: An exemption benefit should not be denied on a mere technical lapse where the underlying factual entitlement can be established on reconsideration.

---