Procedural lapse cannot deny exemption when substantive conditions are met under International Competitive Bidding supplies.

Clearances made under Notification No. 12/2012-CE against International Competitive Bidding were held eligible for exemption where the Project Authority Certificate was undisputed and the substantive conditions for the benefit were satisfied. A procedural omission linked to a different notification and circular could not defeat the exemption when the underlying eligibility and genuineness of the supplies were established. The duty demand was therefore unsustainable, and the consequential personal penalty also could not survive.

---

---

Issues: Whether the assessee was entitled to exemption under Notification No. 12/2012-CE for clearances made against International Competitive Bidding on the basis of the Project Authority Certificate, and whether the benefit could be denied for non-observance of a procedural requirement.

Analysis: The clearance was made under Notification No. 12/2012-CE, and the Project Authority Certificate was not in dispute. The only objection rested on non-compliance with a procedural requirement associated with a different notification and circular. The substantive conditions for the exemption stood satisfied, and the earlier order in the assessee's own case had already held that such procedural omission could not defeat the exemption when the underlying eligibility and genuineness of the supplies were established. Since the duty demand itself was not sustainable, the consequential personal penalty also could not survive.

Conclusion: The assessee was entitled to the exemption, and the denial of benefit on a procedural ground was unsustainable.

Ratio Decidendi: Where the substantive requirements for an exemption are fulfilled, a mere procedural lapse cannot be used to deny the exemption or sustain a consequential penalty.

---