https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=330121 Rebate of duty under Rule 18 of the Central Excise Rules, 2002 read with Notification No. 19/2004-CE (N.T.) required strict compliance with the prescribed documentary procedure. The original ARE-1 and excise invoice had to be produced for verification to establish export of the duty-paid goods and satisfy the conditions of the rebate notification. Photocopies were not treated as adequate compliance, and general procedural leniency could not override the mandatory documentary requirements. On that basis, the rebate claim was held inadmissible and rejection of the claim was upheld. en-us Tue, 29 Mar 2016 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 10 Feb 2017 14:15:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=330121 Rebate of duty under Rule 18 of the Central Excise Rules, 2002 read with Notification No. 19/2004-CE (N.T.) required strict compliance with the prescribed documentary procedure. The original ARE-1 and excise invoice had to be produced for verification to establish export of the duty-paid goods and satisfy the conditions of the rebate notification. Photocopies were not treated as adequate compliance, and general procedural leniency could not override the mandatory documentary requirements. On that basis, the rebate claim was held inadmissible and rejection of the claim was upheld. Case-Laws Central Excise Tue, 29 Mar 2016 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=330121