https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=30595 Exemption under Notification No. 108/95-C.E. was treated as a substantive end-use benefit for goods supplied to the United Nations or an international organisation, so the certificate requirement operated only as a procedural safeguard against misuse. Where it was undisputed that the goods were actually supplied for the eligible project, delayed production of the certificate could not by itself defeat the exemption. The same approach applied where the certificate was issued in the supplier's name rather than the manufacturer's name, because the notification did not require that formality and the admitted eligible use remained the decisive factor. On these facts, the exemption remained available. en-us Thu, 03 Apr 2008 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 05 Sep 2008 00:00:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=30595 Exemption under Notification No. 108/95-C.E. was treated as a substantive end-use benefit for goods supplied to the United Nations or an international organisation, so the certificate requirement operated only as a procedural safeguard against misuse. Where it was undisputed that the goods were actually supplied for the eligible project, delayed production of the certificate could not by itself defeat the exemption. The same approach applied where the certificate was issued in the supplier's name rather than the manufacturer's name, because the notification did not require that formality and the admitted eligible use remained the decisive factor. On these facts, the exemption remained available. Case-Laws Central Excise Thu, 03 Apr 2008 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=30595