Substantial compliance under Notification No. 80/80 upheld where clearance limits were met and declaration filing was treated as valid.

Notification No. 80/80 exemption was available where the aggregate value of clearances remained within the prescribed ceiling and the new manufacturer's declaration showed that clearances were not likely to exceed that limit. A declaration sent through the classification list was treated as filed with the Assistant Collector because the papers were submitted for approval, and the exemption could not be denied on the ground that the declaration was addressed to the Superintendent. Clearances made before formal approval of the classification list did not defeat relief, since the notification's substantive conditions were substantially complied with and the technical objection was rejected.

---

---

Issues: Whether the respondents were entitled to the benefit of Notification No. 80/80 despite the declaration being addressed to the Superintendent and the commencement of clearances before formal approval of the classification list.

Analysis: Notification No. 80/80 required that the aggregate value of clearances should be within the prescribed limit and, in the case of a new manufacturer, that a declaration be filed with the Assistant Collector that the clearances were not likely to exceed that limit. The respondents' clearances were admittedly within the statutory ceiling. The declaration contained in the letter sent through the classification list was treated as having been filed with the Assistant Collector because the papers were submitted for his approval. Even though some clearances preceded approval of the classification list, the requirements of the notification were substantially complied with, and the exemption could not be denied on a technical objection when the substantive conditions were satisfied.

Conclusion: The benefit of Notification No. 80/80 was rightly extended to the respondents, and the appeal failed.

---