https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=90548 Eligibility for exemption under Notification No. 167/79 turned on substantive proof that blinkers and voltage regulators manufactured in one unit were actually used in scooter manufacture in another unit of the same assessee. The absence of a prior declaration or strict procedural compliance did not, by itself, defeat the exemption where records or other evidence later established intended and actual use in excisable scooter production. On the facts found, the denial of exemption was unsustainable. A penalty could not be justified once the record showed actual supply and use of the goods in scooter manufacture, because the procedural lapse alone did not support an evasion finding. en-us Thu, 10 Sep 1998 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 08 Oct 2011 18:21:16 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=90548 Eligibility for exemption under Notification No. 167/79 turned on substantive proof that blinkers and voltage regulators manufactured in one unit were actually used in scooter manufacture in another unit of the same assessee. The absence of a prior declaration or strict procedural compliance did not, by itself, defeat the exemption where records or other evidence later established intended and actual use in excisable scooter production. On the facts found, the denial of exemption was unsustainable. A penalty could not be justified once the record showed actual supply and use of the goods in scooter manufacture, because the procedural lapse alone did not support an evasion finding. Case-Laws Central Excise Thu, 10 Sep 1998 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=90548