https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=191322 Rule 18 rebate entitlement depends on substantive compliance with the duty-paid export conditions, while the prescribed documentary steps are procedural. The requirement to produce the original and duplicate ARE-1 forms is meant to facilitate verification, but it is not the only mode of proof. Where contemporaneous documents such as shipping bills, bills of lading, mate receipts and the triplicate ARE-1 establish export of duty-paid goods directly from the factory, rebate cannot be denied merely for non-production of the original and duplicate ARE-1 copies. The document concludes that such non-production is a procedural lapse, not a substantive bar to rebate. en-us Wed, 12 Jun 2013 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 30 Mar 2017 14:46:45 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=191322 Rule 18 rebate entitlement depends on substantive compliance with the duty-paid export conditions, while the prescribed documentary steps are procedural. The requirement to produce the original and duplicate ARE-1 forms is meant to facilitate verification, but it is not the only mode of proof. Where contemporaneous documents such as shipping bills, bills of lading, mate receipts and the triplicate ARE-1 establish export of duty-paid goods directly from the factory, rebate cannot be denied merely for non-production of the original and duplicate ARE-1 copies. The document concludes that such non-production is a procedural lapse, not a substantive bar to rebate. Case-Laws Central Excise Wed, 12 Jun 2013 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=191322