Rebate procedure under Central Excise Rules was directory, allowing relief where duty-paid goods were exported and identity was proved

Rule 12(1) of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 was treated as a procedural requirement intended to facilitate rebate claims, not as a mandatory bar defeating them on technical grounds. The proviso allowing the Collector to relax the procedure where the same duty-paid goods were exported showed that compliance could be waived when duty payment, export, and identity of goods were undisputed. On that basis, the rebate claim was accepted and rebate of duty was held admissible.

---

---

Issues: Whether the procedural requirement under Rule 12(1) of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 for claiming rebate of duty was mandatory or directory, and whether rebate was admissible when the goods on which duty had been paid were found to have been exported.

Analysis: Rule 12 of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 provides for rebate of duty and the procedure to be followed under sub-rule (1), together with a proviso enabling relaxation by the Collector when satisfied that the same duty-paid goods were exported. The availability of such relaxation showed that the procedural requirement was intended to facilitate the claim and not to defeat it on technical grounds. The finding that there was no dispute about duty payment, export, and the identity of the goods supported application of the relaxation power and acceptance of the rebate claim.

Conclusion: Rule 12(1) was held to be directory and procedural, not mandatory, and rebate of duty was held admissible to the assessee.

---