https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=247824 Exemption under Notification No. 17/2001-Cus. remained available where the imported goods were actually used for the intended leather industry purpose, even though the end-use certificate was filed late. The notification required both end-use compliance and production of the certificate within the stipulated or extended time, but the record showed that the substantive condition of intended use had been satisfied and the certificate was ultimately submitted to Customs. On that basis, delayed filing was treated as a procedural lapse rather than a ground to deny the exemption, and the denial of benefit was not justified. en-us Thu, 04 Apr 2013 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 23 May 2014 11:32:43 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=247824 Exemption under Notification No. 17/2001-Cus. remained available where the imported goods were actually used for the intended leather industry purpose, even though the end-use certificate was filed late. The notification required both end-use compliance and production of the certificate within the stipulated or extended time, but the record showed that the substantive condition of intended use had been satisfied and the certificate was ultimately submitted to Customs. On that basis, delayed filing was treated as a procedural lapse rather than a ground to deny the exemption, and the denial of benefit was not justified. Case-Laws Customs Thu, 04 Apr 2013 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=247824