https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=73146 End-use exemption under Notification No. 276/67 was treated as covering propylene used for essential start-up and trial operations, because such preparatory activity formed part of the manufacturing process and the goods were used for production of the specified commodities rather than as fuel. A refund claim based on duty paid under protest was also found maintainable by the industrial user, supported by the manufacturer's no-objection certificate, with the locus standi objection rejected as a belated technicality. Non-compliance with Chapter X procedure did not defeat relief where the revenue had supervised receipt of the goods and the substantive conditions were otherwise satisfied. en-us Mon, 27 May 1985 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 28 May 2011 13:24:31 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=73146 End-use exemption under Notification No. 276/67 was treated as covering propylene used for essential start-up and trial operations, because such preparatory activity formed part of the manufacturing process and the goods were used for production of the specified commodities rather than as fuel. A refund claim based on duty paid under protest was also found maintainable by the industrial user, supported by the manufacturer's no-objection certificate, with the locus standi objection rejected as a belated technicality. Non-compliance with Chapter X procedure did not defeat relief where the revenue had supervised receipt of the goods and the substantive conditions were otherwise satisfied. Case-Laws Central Excise Mon, 27 May 1985 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=73146