https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=331319 Failure to furnish proof of export within the stipulated period did not justify penalty and interest where the export itself was established and the Department accepted its authenticity. The Bombay HC treated the delayed production of proof as a procedural lapse, not a breach of a substantive exemption condition, because no provision was shown to impose penal consequences for late filing alone. As the assessee had satisfied the substantive requirements for exemption, the impugned orders were quashed and the exemption benefit was upheld. en-us Fri, 17 Jun 2016 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 14 Nov 2016 18:10:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=331319 Failure to furnish proof of export within the stipulated period did not justify penalty and interest where the export itself was established and the Department accepted its authenticity. The Bombay HC treated the delayed production of proof as a procedural lapse, not a breach of a substantive exemption condition, because no provision was shown to impose penal consequences for late filing alone. As the assessee had satisfied the substantive requirements for exemption, the impugned orders were quashed and the exemption benefit was upheld. Case-Laws Central Excise Fri, 17 Jun 2016 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=331319