https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=85888 Non-declaration in the AR form and failure to obtain Customs verification and endorsement under the DEEC scheme were treated as a substantial breach, not a condonable procedural lapse. The export documents did not show that the goods were exported toward discharge of the advance licence obligation, preventing Customs officers from verifying compliance with licence and policy requirements. A certificate from the Central Excise Inspector at the factory was not accepted as a substitute for Customs satisfaction. The verification and endorsement requirements were held to be safeguards of substance intended to prevent misuse of the duty exemption scheme, so regularisation under the scheme was denied. en-us Mon, 27 May 1996 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 08 Aug 2011 17:23:22 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=85888 Non-declaration in the AR form and failure to obtain Customs verification and endorsement under the DEEC scheme were treated as a substantial breach, not a condonable procedural lapse. The export documents did not show that the goods were exported toward discharge of the advance licence obligation, preventing Customs officers from verifying compliance with licence and policy requirements. A certificate from the Central Excise Inspector at the factory was not accepted as a substitute for Customs satisfaction. The verification and endorsement requirements were held to be safeguards of substance intended to prevent misuse of the duty exemption scheme, so regularisation under the scheme was denied. Case-Laws Customs Mon, 27 May 1996 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=85888