https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=81759 Where goods were actually exported and were not shown to have been diverted for home consumption, procedural lapses such as failure to follow AR 4 formalities or to include the item in the licence did not defeat the substantive export benefit. The duty demand was therefore unsustainable and was set aside. On penalty, the absence of intent to evade duty justified only a limited sanction for the procedural omission, so the penalty was reduced substantially from Rs. 50,000 to Rs. 2,000. en-us Tue, 14 Jan 1992 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 28 Jun 2011 16:47:46 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=81759 Where goods were actually exported and were not shown to have been diverted for home consumption, procedural lapses such as failure to follow AR 4 formalities or to include the item in the licence did not defeat the substantive export benefit. The duty demand was therefore unsustainable and was set aside. On penalty, the absence of intent to evade duty justified only a limited sanction for the procedural omission, so the penalty was reduced substantially from Rs. 50,000 to Rs. 2,000. Case-Laws Central Excise Tue, 14 Jan 1992 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=81759