https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=276490 Rule 5 of the Sugar Export Promotion Rules, 1973 required prior intimation from the export agency about failure to deliver export quota as a condition precedent for excise action. Because the show cause notice and impugned order did not refer to any such intimation, and the record did not show it as the basis of the demand, the Tribunal treated the departmental proceedings as unsustainable. Certificates issued by the export corporation also supported compliance with the export obligation. The demand was held unsustainable, the proceedings were declared ab initio void, and the appeals succeeded with consequential relief. en-us Thu, 30 Jul 2015 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 13 Nov 2018 07:46:23 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=276490 Rule 5 of the Sugar Export Promotion Rules, 1973 required prior intimation from the export agency about failure to deliver export quota as a condition precedent for excise action. Because the show cause notice and impugned order did not refer to any such intimation, and the record did not show it as the basis of the demand, the Tribunal treated the departmental proceedings as unsustainable. Certificates issued by the export corporation also supported compliance with the export obligation. The demand was held unsustainable, the proceedings were declared ab initio void, and the appeals succeeded with consequential relief. Case-Laws Central Excise Thu, 30 Jul 2015 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=276490