https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=265845 Notification No. 43/2001 was construed as requiring proof that goods manufactured from duty-free raw materials were exported, not that the appellant itself must have effected the export. The excise permission allowed duty-free raw materials to be cleared for further processing for export, and the appellant satisfied the authority by furnishing proof of export of the finished goods. Read in light of the notification's object, the export condition was treated as met even though the appellant was not the exporter. The demand therefore did not survive and the appeal was allowed. en-us Wed, 08 Apr 2015 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 09 May 2016 11:53:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=265845 Notification No. 43/2001 was construed as requiring proof that goods manufactured from duty-free raw materials were exported, not that the appellant itself must have effected the export. The excise permission allowed duty-free raw materials to be cleared for further processing for export, and the appellant satisfied the authority by furnishing proof of export of the finished goods. Read in light of the notification's object, the export condition was treated as met even though the appellant was not the exporter. The demand therefore did not survive and the appeal was allowed. Case-Laws Central Excise Wed, 08 Apr 2015 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=265845