https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=344753 CESTAT treated the prior written exercise of option and intimation to jurisdictional excise authorities under Notification No. 50/2003-CE, as amended, as a mandatory condition for the area-based exemption. The requirement was held to go to the substance of eligibility, because it was inserted to prevent misuse and enable departmental monitoring, so non-compliance could not be treated as a mere procedural lapse. The principle of substantial compliance was therefore unavailable, and the exemption was correctly denied for failure to satisfy the essential pre-condition. en-us Fri, 23 Jun 2017 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 24 Jul 2018 18:58:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=344753 CESTAT treated the prior written exercise of option and intimation to jurisdictional excise authorities under Notification No. 50/2003-CE, as amended, as a mandatory condition for the area-based exemption. The requirement was held to go to the substance of eligibility, because it was inserted to prevent misuse and enable departmental monitoring, so non-compliance could not be treated as a mere procedural lapse. The principle of substantial compliance was therefore unavailable, and the exemption was correctly denied for failure to satisfy the essential pre-condition. Case-Laws Central Excise Fri, 23 Jun 2017 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=344753