Tea auction rebate claims may be proved by auction documents and broker certificates, not only gate passes.

For rebate claims on tea purchased in auctions and exported as blended tea, proof of duty payment need not be confined to original gate passes where the notification scheme, read with clarificatory notifications and trade notice, recognises broker certificates and related auction documents. Subsidiary documentary evidence can therefore satisfy the condition of payment of duty after 9-9-1986. Gate passes were not mandatory as the sole mode of proof in auction purchases, and rebate claims had to be examined without insisting on them as indispensable documents.

---

---

Issues: Whether, for rebate claims in respect of tea purchased in auctions and exported as blended tea, production of gate passes was mandatory to prove payment of duty on or after 9-9-1986.

Analysis: The relevant notification and subsequent clarificatory notifications were read together. For tea purchased in auctions, the scheme contemplated proof through the broker's certificate and related auction documents, rather than insistence on original gate passes. The trade notice and later notification indicated that gate passes were not the exclusive or mandatory mode of proof in such cases, and that subsidiary documentary evidence could be relied upon to satisfy the condition regarding payment of duty.

Conclusion: Gate passes were held not to be mandatory for tea purchased in auctions, and the order directing reconsideration on the basis of subsidiary documentary evidence was upheld.

Final Conclusion: The challenge to the appellate order failed, and the rebate claims were required to be examined without insisting on gate passes as an indispensable document in auction purchases.

Ratio Decidendi: Where the notification scheme for auction-purchased tea permits proof of duty payment through specified auction-related documents, gate passes cannot be insisted upon as the sole mandatory evidence.

---