https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=93820 Explanation 4 to Notification No. 115/86 was treated as a method for working out exemption, not as a pre-condition to claim it, and a monthly basis for the refund claim was accepted at the prima facie stage. The assessee therefore had a prima facie case despite the alleged non-compliance. The notification also did not make maintenance of registers a mandatory condition; records maintained under other regulatory requirements were treated as sufficient to support the calculation at the interim stage. On both issues, the assessee was found to have a strong prima facie case, and recovery of the balance duty was stayed by waiving further pre-deposit. en-us Fri, 11 Aug 2000 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 17 Nov 2011 11:49:27 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=93820 Explanation 4 to Notification No. 115/86 was treated as a method for working out exemption, not as a pre-condition to claim it, and a monthly basis for the refund claim was accepted at the prima facie stage. The assessee therefore had a prima facie case despite the alleged non-compliance. The notification also did not make maintenance of registers a mandatory condition; records maintained under other regulatory requirements were treated as sufficient to support the calculation at the interim stage. On both issues, the assessee was found to have a strong prima facie case, and recovery of the balance duty was stayed by waiving further pre-deposit. Case-Laws Central Excise Fri, 11 Aug 2000 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=93820