Export refund credit cannot be denied when shipping bills and related documents sufficiently prove export.

Refund of credit on inputs used in goods exported under bond could not be denied merely because AR 4/AR 4A forms were absent. Where shipping bills, bills of lading, GP 2s and bank certificates established export, Notification No. 85/77-C.E. and Rule 57F(3) treated such documents as sufficient evidence of export. The appellate authority could therefore recognise the refund as admissible when the underlying credit was otherwise allowable, with actual sanction to follow by the proper officer. The document rejects insistence on AR 4/AR 4A as a mandatory proof requirement in these circumstances.

---

---

Issues: Whether refund of credit taken on inputs used in the manufacture of final products exported under bond could be denied for want of AR 4/AR 4A when shipping bills, bills of lading, GP 2s and bank certificates were produced.

Analysis: Refund of duty credit is governed by the conditions and limitations of the relevant notification. Notification No. 85/77-C.E. dated 1-3-1987 expressly recognises a bill of lading or shipping bill as acceptable evidence of export under Rule 57F(3) of the Central Excise Rules, 1944. Since the respondent produced shipping bills, GP 2s and bank certificates, the fact of export stood established and nothing further was required to prove export merely because AR 4/AR 4A forms were absent. The appellate authority was also competent to hold the refund admissible where the credit was otherwise allowable, leaving actual sanction to the proper officer.

Conclusion: The refund could not be rejected on the ground that AR 4/AR 4A forms were not produced, and shipping bills were valid proof of export in the circumstances.

---