Prescribed consumption certificate requirement under customs exemption notification could not be replaced by a Chartered Accountant's certificate.

Exemption under Notification No. 46/85-Cus. was conditional on filing the prescribed consumption certificate from the Assistant Collector of Central Excise within the stipulated time under the bond and undertaking. A certificate issued by a Chartered Accountant did not satisfy that express requirement, because the notification and bond specifically mandated certification by the Assistant Collector and a prior notice could not override those terms. The demand was therefore confirmed, and the assessee's appeal failed.

---

---

Issues: Whether the appellants could satisfy the condition in Notification No. 46/85-Cus. by producing a certificate from a Chartered Accountant instead of a consumption certificate from the Assistant Collector of Central Excise.

Analysis: The exemption was availed subject to a bond and a specific undertaking to produce the prescribed consumption certificate within the stipulated time. The wording of the notification and the bond required certification from the Assistant Collector of Central Excise. The certificate produced from a Chartered Accountant did not fulfil that condition, and the prior notice relied upon could not override the express terms of the notification and bond.

Conclusion: The Chartered Accountant's certificate was not an acceptable substitute, and the demand was rightly confirmed. The appeal was against the assessee.

---